On Fri, 21 Nov 2003, Rob Austein wrote:
> Please clearly state to the mailing list whether you support or oppose
> this draft going to the IESG.
> 
> Please do not express an opinion if you have not read the draft.
> 
> As always, please discuss substantive issues on the WG mailing list.
> Minor editorial comments may be sent directly to the draft authors
> (please CC the WG chairs on any such comments so that we can track
> this).

I believe the document should be published as BCP soon.  It may need a
revision yet.

As for the comments the others have made, I have no objection to
raising the recommendation from one v4 DNS server to two; however, I
don't believe this is necessary.  These are supposed to be MINIMUM
requirements.  It apparently isn't sufficiently clear that it makes a
lot of sense to have all of them v4-capable, and with *robust*
connectivity.

Major issues:

None.

Nits:

   unfragmented IPv4 name space and there are strong reasons to find a
   mechanism to avoid it.
==> s/to find a mechanism// (or reword 'mechanism' to something more 
generic, like 'method')

   The RECOMMENDED guidelines are compatible with the operation of
==> s/RECOMMENDED/recommended/ (uppercase seems inappropriate here)

6. Author Addresses
==> s/Author/Authors'/

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

.
dnsop resources:_____________________________________________________
web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop.html
mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop/index.html

Reply via email to