On Jul 2, 2013, at 11:06, Paul Hoffman wrote: > There are many drafts and RFCs produced by the IETF that do not "impact > interoperability". This document describes an operational issue. That seems > kind of appropriate for the DNSOP WG, yes?
Since you asked, no. [0] I don't see an operational issue, not in the DNS operational sense. If there is an application that is so sensitive to delay, it can pre-fetch data as it needs, this doesn't need to be pressed into the infrastructure. As other messages indicate, implementations already do this. It's fine for an individual submission to document what they do, what's the need for a WG review/development/stamp of approval? [0] The charter is wide open to this, still I would say no. It's worth noting that the charter's latest milestone is February 2008. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Edward Lewis NeuStar You can leave a voice message at +1-571-434-5468 There are no answers - just tradeoffs, decisions, and responses.
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
