> On Mar 1, 2019, at 12:54 PM, Dave Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Paul Hoffman writes:
>> I'm not sure a standards track document that updates RFC 1034/1035
>> should be recommending a minimum TTL.
>
> As previously noted, we're making no such recommendation and that will
> be clarified.
"Attempts to refresh from the authorities are recommended to be done no more
frequently than every 30 seconds" feels like a recommendation because of the
words "are recommended".
> The recommendations, however, are not in conflict with each other and
> I'm really not clear myself on where the criticism that they are
> confusing comes from.
What is confusing is whether or not they are recommendations. If they are
recommendations, why don't they appear in Section 4 with SHOULD and MAY
languages? If they are not, how is an implementer meant to read them?
> (Personally I'd renumber 6.1 -> 7,
> 7 -> 8, etc, but that's a minor separate issue.)
+1
--Paul Hoffman
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
