In your previous mail you wrote: So they are aware that this is broken. Let's hope that this type of service discovery through a fraction DNS root doesn't make its way into the final standard.
=> I agree but what you propose to do? There will be a double session of behave WG tomorrow afternoon but this draft (which is not a WG item) is not in the agenda, so IMHO it is not useful to worry behave chairs. Perhaps we should only say the document should not become a WG item if the defect is not repaired first (i.e., get it killed or fixed)? Thanks [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
