Yes; will fix (I think I said in another message). Off today, will catch up again next week.
Lee From: DNSOP <dnsop-boun...@ietf.org<mailto:dnsop-boun...@ietf.org>> on behalf of Ted Lemon <mel...@fugue.com<mailto:mel...@fugue.com>> Date: Friday, May 6, 2016 7:26 AM To: "sth...@nethelp.no<mailto:sth...@nethelp.no>" <sth...@nethelp.no<mailto:sth...@nethelp.no>> Cc: tjw ietf <tjw.i...@gmail.com<mailto:tjw.i...@gmail.com>>, dnsop WG <dnsop@ietf.org<mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>> Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call draft-ietf-dnsop-isp-ip6rdns I believe that this was unintentional. I think Lee agreed to fix it. On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 5:32 AM, <sth...@nethelp.no<mailto:sth...@nethelp.no>> wrote: > > The point of this document is not to make normative requirements. > > But it does: 'Best practice is that "Every Internet-reachable host > should have a name"'. I agree. Especially with IPv6 in mind, "Every Internet-reachable host should have a name" is *not* best practice. Steinar Haug, AS2116 ________________________________ This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
