On 25 Jun 2026, at 08:16, [email protected] wrote:
> Without digging into the technical merits of OLD vs NEW, the text you flagged
> reflects the intended behavior as further confirmed in Section 10:
>
> Section 5.4 recommends logging these as
> errors and continuing to wait for a signed response until the request
> times out.
>
> I don't think filling an errata is appropriate here. This errata falls under
> the following case [1]:
>
> "Changes that modify the working of a protocol to something that might be
> different from the intended consensus when the document was approved should
> generally be Rejected. Significant clarifications should not be handled as
> errata reports and need to be discussed by the relevant technical community."
>
> My current take is to reject it.
That logic seems reasonable. But the change that Ondrej suggested also seems
reasonable. So we wrote some words while I was waiting for a train. This is a
short draft that updates 8945 to reflect the suggested change.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sury-dnsop-tsig-clarify/
Joe
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
