No, DNS Update is the name of a protocol. We aren't talking about a DNS 
Update—we are talking about the DNS Update Protocol [RFC2136]. We normally 
leave out "Protocol" but it should be assumed when you are considering whether 
an article is needed there.

> On 30 May 2025, at 18:10, Sarah Tarrant <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Stuart and Ted,
> 
> Thank you for your reply. We have updated the document accordingly.
> 
> We have one remaining question, regarding:
>> * I don’t think writing “a <proper-noun>” is right. We wouldn’t write 
>> “Implementations of *a* TCP” or “Implementations of *a* DHCP”.
>> 
>> OLD:
>> Implementations of a
>> traditional DNS Update [RFC2136] do not normally provide a way to
>> enforce a constraint of this type.
>> NEW:
>> Implementations of
>> traditional DNS Update [RFC2136] do not normally provide a way to
>> enforce a constraint of this type.
> 
> We hesitate to make this change as it currently reads "Implementations of a 
> traditional DNS Update" (a traditional ... Update) and not "Implementations 
> of a traditional DNS" (a traditional DNS).
> 
> Would you like to remove both "Update" and "a"?
> 
> CURRENT:
> Implementations of a
> traditional DNS Update [RFC2136] do not normally provide a way to
> enforce a constraint of this type.
> 
> NEW:
> Implementations of
> traditional DNS [RFC2136] do not normally provide a way to
> enforce a constraint of this type.
> 
> 
> The updated files have been posted here (please refresh):
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9665.txt
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9665.pdf
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9665.html
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9665.xml
> 
> The relevant diff files have been posted here (please refresh):
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9665-diff.html (comprehensive diff)
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9665-auth48diff.html (AUTH48 changes 
> only)
> 
> Note that it may be necessary for you to refresh your browser to view the 
> most recent version. 
> 
> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9665
> 
> Thank you,
> RFC Editor/st
> 
>> On May 29, 2025, at 11:09 PM, Stuart Cheshire <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> One correction. In my last email I missed the word “Section”.
>> 
>> OLD:
>> <xref target="RFC1035" section="3.5" sectionFormat="of"/>
>> <xref target="RFC3596" section="2.5" sectionFormat="of"/>
>> 
>> NEW:
>> Section <xref target="RFC1035" section="3.5" sectionFormat="bare"/>
>> Section <xref target="RFC3596" section="2.5" sectionFormat="bare”/
>> 
>> Stuart Cheshire
>> 
> 

-- 
auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to