[dns-wg] DNSSEC Policy Development Process

Jim,

> I personally think the reference to DLV needs to be replaced with
> something more generic

I concur.

> So from that perspective, it may be better if the text in the
> proposal was made more generic. Perhaps it should say something like
> "The NCC would consider publishing its KSKs in appropriate registries
> that may emerge to facilitate the establishment of DNSSEC trust
> anchors"?

I don't think that would be even necessary. The document already states "
Maintenance of these keys is a process that does not scale well. We are 
working to come up with a solution to this issue."

> how about establishing a trust anchor for .arpa
> and have the NCC's KSKs signed by that? 

Is .arpa signed?

Regards,
Marcos