I think this is a good clarification Olafur
On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 8:53 AM Peter J. Philipp <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi again, > > Well I ended up fixing it myself yesterday through a lot of trial and > error and finally understanding the > > RFC. I recommend the following change to make it easier for future > implementors in the 2845bis draft: > > Section 6.4 says: > > The first envelope is processed as a standard answer, and subsequent > messages have the following digest components: > > I would rewrite that as: > > The first envelope is processed as a standard answer (see section 6.2), > and subsequent messages have the following digest components: > > With the referal to section 6.2, a hasty eye can catch what a "standard > answer" is and assumptions are left out. > > BTW I'm working with this draft document: > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc2845bis/?include_text=1 > > Best Regards, > > -peter > > > On 2/27/19 9:21 AM, Peter J. Philipp wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm in contact with the original RFC 2845 authors for clarifications > > on what is meant in section 4.4 for the meaning of "Prior MAC > > (running)". In the bis draft this is in section 6.4 and seems > > unchanged. I'm having a hard time understanding this as an > > implementor, this is an area that needs clarification I believe. > > > > Would you like to see any results that I glean from the authors so > > that this can be put on the bis draft? > > > > Best Regards, > > > > -peter > > > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > -- Ólafur Gudmundsson | Engineering Director www.cloudflare.com blog.cloudflare.com
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
