Good guidance on Informational vs. BCP. We may get there eventually, but I thought that starting as a draft BCP might provoke more detailed and useful debate. ;-)
On the topic of lying resolvers¹ though, that seems a bit strong IMHO. But perhaps I have missed a strong MUST statement (per RFC 2119) in a relevant RFC that you could refer me to? Jason On 7/11/09 7:59 PM, "Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoff...@vpnc.org> wrote: > It seems inappropriate for the IETF to bless lying resolvers as a Best Current > Practice. I doubt we as a community could have consensus on when lying is > good, when it is neutral, and when it is bad. Without such agreement, we can't > agree on how to run such servers. Having said that, the publication of a > document such as this (with more input from the community) as a Informational > RFC could indeed help the Internet. > > --Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
