No reason to do it now; it can wait. b
On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 12:57 AM Warren Kumari <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 7:42 AM Barry Leiba <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I am handling this document as responsible AD because Warren, who would >> otherwise do it, is <strike>irresponsible</strike> an author of the >> document. >> >> I have only two comments, below, that are total nits, and I will request >> last call as soon as I send this message. Nice work, as always, Warren and >> Paul. >> > > Awesome, thank you. > Please let me / us know if you would like a new version posted with the > below comments addressed, or if you would prefer we wait until after LC > ends. > > Thanks again, > W > > > >> Barry >> >> — Section 1.2 — >> It’s a small thing, but please use the BCP 14 boilerplate from RFC 8174 >> exactly (you left out “NOT RECOMMENDED” here). >> >> — Section 4 — >> >> As stated in Section 1, this design explicitly only allows the local >> copy of the root zone information to be available only from resolvers >> >> Nit: you don’t need both “only”s. I suggest removing the first one. >> >> -- > I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea > in the first place. > This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing > regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of > pants. > ---maf >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
