Andrew may have not made his point clear to the authors, but I think it is an important one: you need to treat the two options the same if you want the DNS community to take this document seriously. If this were just meant as an Informational RFC that stated the way CNNIC was thinking, of course it is not important to be balanced, but the intended status of this document is BCP, which is essentially like standards track.
If later versions of this document boil down to "technical problems with DNAME and policy enforcement problems with NS", that's fine. However, such a document would probably not become a Best Current Practice because it is simply stating a tradeoff. We have no operational experience to say which side of the tradeoff is "best". --Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
