On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Tony Finch <[email protected]> wrote:

> Tim Wicinski <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >     draft-spacek-dnsop-update-clarif, Spacek
>
> Note that my 2317bis draft has a slightly different take on UPDATE vs
> classless reverse DNS. The UPDATE section of my draft is entirely due to
> Petr's draft, so I'm very grateful to him for pointing out the problem.
> I'm interested in opinions about
>
> - should this be a separate draft or is it sensible to put it in
> rfc2317bis?
>
> - is the indirection problem specific to classless reverse DNS (which is
>   the approach I took) or does it apply everywhere (which is what
>   Petr Spacek's draft says)?
>
> - is my detailed suggested UPDATE behaviour sensible?
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fanf-dnsop-rfc2317bis-00#section-9
>
> Tony.
>
> The UPDATE behavior makes sense to me.

minor nit - The first paragraph in section 9 has "change revers DNS" which
should be "change reverse DNS"

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

Reply via email to