Stéphane,
This is a little late in the process as the BCP has been approved last Thursday
after IESG review ;-)
OTOH, this is editorial changes and do not change the core of the document.
So, I suggest to upload quickly a new revision before it goes in the RFC Editor
queue (where those changes could still happen in AUTH48 state). You, Sara, and
I are in European time zone, so, let's act quickly this Monday morning
-éric
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzme...@nic.fr>
Organization: NIC France
Date: Saturday, 11 July 2020 at 09:48
To: Sara Dickinson <s...@sinodun.com>
Cc: DNS Privacy Working Group <dns-privacy@ietf.org>, Eric Vyncke
<evyn...@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [dns-privacy] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dprive-bcp-op-13.txt
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 09:41:07AM +0100,
Sara Dickinson <s...@sinodun.com> wrote
a message of 61 lines which said:
> This version should address the final comments from the IESG review.
Some very small editorial details:
Abstract "to assist writers of a Recursive operator Privacy statement"
Capital S, for the acronym.
Section 1 "These open resolvers have tended" Rather "public resolvers"
to be consistent with the rest of the paragraph and with RFC 8499.
Section 5.3.1 "Run a copy of the root zone on loopback [RFC7706]"
should now be written "Run a local copy of the root zone [RFC8806]".
Appendix D.2 "Both POST and GET are supported" Can probably be deleted
since RFC 8484 says "DoH servers MUST implement both the POST and GET
methods."
_______________________________________________
dns-privacy mailing list
dns-privacy@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
