Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call draft-ietf-dnsop-resolver-priming

On 17 Aug 2016, at 9:45, 神明達哉 wrote: I've read draft-ietf-dnsop-resolver-priming-07. I think this is a useful document and is almost ready for publication. Thanks for the careful review. But there seem to be a few non-trivial issues that may need to be addressed. Specific comments: -

Re: [DNSOP] The Larger Discussion on Differences in Response Drafts

In message <99ce1d3e-18a0-42e6-949f-e78995afc...@icann.org>, Edward Lewis write s: > On 8/16/16, 08:57, "DNSOP on behalf of Tim Wicinski" on behalf of tjw.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I've only read briefly the drafts and see hints that issues I raise below > are still

Re: [DNSOP] The Larger Discussion on Differences in Response Drafts

On 8/19/16, 13:24, "william manning" wrote: >First off, I take exception to the use of the word "dangerous".  AXFR isn't >dangerous, it's just the best way to do the job.  If there are other query >types that are better (or only) can be done over TCP, then so be it. 

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-key-tag-02.txt

At Wed, 10 Aug 2016 16:54:39 -0700, "Paul Hoffman" wrote: > [[ A month later, we're still eager to hear responses to the draft. We > got a few that we have incorporated for a new version, but want to be > sure we're on the right track before we move ahead. ]] > > We

Re: [DNSOP]  Working Group Last Call draft-ietf-dnsop-resolver-priming

All The WGLC last call for resolver-priming has concluded. There was a solid number of good reviews, and no reasons to not publish this. I want to thank everyone who gave reviews and feedback. I'm going to go over the list with the author(s) and make sure everything was covered. thanks

Re: [DNSOP] [apps-discuss] Draft of interest in DNSOP: draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf

Patrik, > On Aug 9, 2016, at 12:06 PM, Patrik Fältström wrote: > > On 4 Aug 2016, at 18:55, Dave Crocker wrote: > For URI records RFC 7553 says they're either named the same as SRV records, or they use enumservice names from the Enumservice >>> >>> Declaring a

Re: [DNSOP] The Larger Discussion on Differences in Response Drafts

On 8/16/16, 08:57, "DNSOP on behalf of Tim Wicinski" wrote: I've only read briefly the drafts and see hints that issues I raise below are still lingering. There's no denying that there's a desire to solve "this". I keep in mind that