On 6 Feb 2018, at 8:04, Petr Špaček wrote:
On 6.2.2018 13:22, Tony Finch wrote:
A. Schulze <s...@andreasschulze.de> wrote:
Yes, "kskroll-sentinel-is-ta-NNNN" is more descriptive and specific.
I also prefer that longer variant.
Yes, more friendly for web searches if someone is wondering about
weird
queries.
Bonus points if we can get a number reserved by RFC editor, it would
allow us to use name like
test-rfc0000-is-ta-NNNN
test-rfc0000-not-ta-NNNN
That would be super awesome.
...and super-unlikely, given the history of the RFC Series.
Is something like RFC number pre-allocation possible?
Sometimes (rarely), after Working Group Last Call. That's why I
suggested "kskroll-sentinel" since those words are in the WG draft name,
and will probably appear in the IETF Datatracker forever.
--Paul Hoffman
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
