Hi Paul,

Thanks for the update. There's a newer draft circulating between myself and Joe which captures your point. The additional word-smithing is appreciated.

On Sun, 30 Nov 2014, Paul Hoffman wrote:

Greetings again. draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc6304bis obsoletes RFC 6304, therefore it 
should not be indicating that the reader should be familiar with RFC 6304. 
However, the text confuses this in a few ways.

  RFC6304 described the steps required to install a new AS112 node, and
  offered advice relating to such a node's operation.  This document
  updates that advice to facilitate the addition and removal of zones
  for which query traffic will be sunk at AS112 nodes, using DNAME,
  whilst still supporting direct delegations to AS112 name servers.

This document doesn't "update that advice", it replaces it.

  [RFC6304] describes an approach whereby zones whose traffic should be
  directed towards an AS112 sink should be directly delegated to AS112
  name servers.  Correspondingly, each AS112 node is manually
  configured to answer appropriately for those zones.

  The guidance in this document preserves this capability for the zones
  that were originally delegated in this fashion.  AS112 nodes that
  were implemented in accordance with the guidance in [RFC6304] will
  continue to provide service for those zones.

This should be "This document describes an approach..." and "...with the guidance in 
this document will..."

--Paul Hoffman
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop


wfms

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Reply via email to