On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 09:57:02AM +1100, Mark Andrews <ma...@isc.org> wrote a message of 82 lines which said:
> It is a SHOULD not a MUST. Having a existing cache entry is a > reasonable exception to the SHOULD. Yes. So, it's already allowed by the draft. To make it clearer-than-clear, We could add after the last paragraph of "Implementation considerations", something like: Another reason to have a SHOULD and not a MUST is if a cache prefers serving cached data (not yet expired) which is below the NXDOMAIN cut, even after receiving a NXDOMAIN for a name located above the cached data. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
