Dave Lawrence wrote:
Dave Lawrence writes:
The main changes, based on previous feedback, are:
* Clarifying what the action is for Standards Track;
* Describing the algorithm previously proposed (and still included) as
one example way of achieving the goals; and,
* Adding a rough proposal for an EDNS option that could be used for
explicit signalling.
That last item will be fleshed out more if there's demonstrated
interest from implementers in having such a thing.
At the moment I'll observe there are no open issues against the draft,
which is my comically passive-aggressive way of pointing out that it
is obviously perfect and so let's just move it along to Last Call.
i apologize for my silence. there's been a lot going on in this WG.
This is now your opportunity to correspondingly observe that someone
is wrong on the Internet and to respond appropriately. At the very
least, we'd like to know whether there is sufficient support for
pursuing the EDNS option or just to take it back out (and leave the
rest of the obviously perfect document as-is).
this document must not proceed without explicit signaling, because this
practice must not grow without explicit signaling.
Thanks in advance for any feedback,
you're welcome in advance!
--
P Vixie
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
