I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
or AD before posting a new version of the draft.
Document: draft-ietf-dnsext-axfr-clarify-13
Reviewer: Vijay K. Gurbani
Review Date: Mar-07-2010
IESG Telechat date: Mar-11-2010
Summary: This draft is ready for publication as a Proposed Standard.
It has 0 major issues, 0 minor issues and 3 nits.
Nits:
1/ S1.2 - What is meant by "non-DNS means"? Do you mean
accessing these databases using raw IP addresses? Please
add a sentence or two clarifying this.
2/ S1.4, last sentence of the section: suggest better to say,
"The goal of this document is to define AXFR as it is
understood by the DNS community to exist today."
3/ S2, last sentence on page 7: "They ought not to interfere
with AXFR ..." Is the interpretation here that the syntax
and semantics of DNS messages should not interfere with
AXFR but the authors are not sure this is indeed the case?
In other words, why not write authoritatively: "The do not
interfere with AXFR ..." instead of hedging your bets and
saying "They ought not to ..."?
Thanks,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60566 (USA)
Email: v...@{alcatel-lucent.com,bell-labs.com,acm.org}
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
