On 10 October 2016 at 12:33, Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-d...@dukhovni.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 01:56:42AM +1100, Mark Andrews wrote: > > > If the IETF was setting servers that went and checked DNS servers > > and informed the operators then the IETF would be in the business > > of enforcing protocols. At this stage I don't see the IETF doing > > that nor is this document asking the IETF to do that. > > > > The is a difference between innovation and not exercising care / > > lazyness. > > > > Returing FORMERR because you see a EDNS flag you don't understand > > is not innovation. > > > > Returing FORMERR because you see a EDNS option you don't understand > > is not innovation. > > > > Returing FORMERR because you see a EDNS version you don't understand > > is not innovation. > > > > If there was anything innovative in what I'm seeing I'd be all for > > it but there isn't. > > Amen. This draft documents widely problematic behaviour that is > seen much too often. It is good to have it all written down in > one place. > I agree. It is very useful in that respect. The specific issue we're discussing here is whether the draft can/should require certain actions from DNS operators based on the behaviour of child zones.
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
