[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       namedroppers
Subject:    Re: Delegation Signer Document Done.
From:       Erik Nordmark <Erik.Nordmark () sun ! com>
Date:       2003-06-27 7:45:00
[Download RAW message or body]


Some quick review comments. If there are no comments requring changes from
the WG these comments can be addressed after the IETF last call is done.

Let me know when you want me to start the IETF last call.

      The key words "MAY","MAY NOT", "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED",
 
There is no "MAY NOT" in RFC 2119.

      5) If the server is not authoritative for any part of the QNAME, a
      response indicating a lame server for QNAME is given.

I'm concerned that implementors might not know how to format
such a response. (Is it a delegation up the tree? something else?)
I haven't seen a definition of a lame response in an RFC so
I think this needs to spell out more about the response to send.

  Erik


--
to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]