Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-13: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I agree with Mirja on her point about this document not seeming to Update rfc2308. Both the IETF Last Call thread [1] and the Shepherd's writeup point at having this document not be Informational so it can Update rfc2308. Putting that point aside, I don't think this document needs to be published as a BCP to reflect the current evolution of the DNS vocabulary. I would prefer it if the status was reconsidered. Given that we're already past IETF LC, I won't stand in the way as I am probably in the rough. I am then balloting "No Objection" because I think this is a clear and important document. [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/9KsgYjBAxz5kzdeFLbht0IWjPkM _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
