Petr Spacek <[email protected]> writes:
> I support this proposal.
Thanks Petr!
> Couple nits I have noticed:
>
> - Term "DNS Publisher" is not used in the whole text except it's
> definition and section 5. Acknowledgments :-)
Excellent point, removed!
> - I'm bit nervous about "should be processed" in section:
> 2.2.2. CSYNC Record Types
>
> This document defines how the following record types may be processed
> if the CSYNC Type Bit Map field indicates they should be processed.
>
> Did you mean SHOULD? Or maybe MUST?
Actually, that isn't supposed to be an authoritative sentence so the
lower should was ok. I changed it to
"This document defines how the following record types may be
processed if the CSYNC Type Bit Map field indicates they are to
be processed."
Ok?
> - Document structure seems a bit too nested to me.
Thanks, I'll work on that
> - Typo: "I.e,"
Good catch!
--
Wes Hardaker
Parsons
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
