On 03/12/2015 23:56, sara wrote: > >> On 2 Dec 2015, at 22:31, Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Hi Sara, >> >>>> >>>> Specifically: >>>> >>>> "Section 6.1.3.2 of [RFC1123] states: >>>> >>>> DNS resolvers and recursive servers MUST support UDP, and SHOULD >>>> support TCP, for sending (non-zone-transfer) queries." >>>> >>>> Please make an explicit statement that this SHOULD is changed to MUST. >>> >>> The bis reproduces 2 statements verbatim from RFC5966 with regard to this. >>> In paragraph 4 of the Introduction: >>> >>> “This document therefore updates the core DNS protocol specifications >>> such that support for TCP is henceforth a REQUIRED part of a full DNS >>> protocol implementation." >>> >>> and in the first sentence of Section 5 >>> >>> “All general-purpose DNS implementations MUST support both UDP and TCP >>> transport.” >>> >>> In light of this do you still think we need another statement to this >>> effect? >> >> Well, this may seem picky, but since you quote the text, I think that >> a clear statement that you are changing it is useful. IMHO, YMMV, of course. > > The sentence is updated in 2 ways > - changing SHOULD to MUST and > - the reference to using TCP just for zone transfers is also removed > which might be why it seemed easier to just restate it in RFC5966. > > Would it help if Section 5 was updated to read: > > “ Section 6.1.3.2 of [RFC1123] is updated: All general-purpose DNS > implementations MUST support both UDP and TCP transport.”
Yes, perfect. (If I hadn't made this comment, I'm sure someone in the IESG would have done so...) > >> >> Adding the "Updates: 1035, 1123" is necessary, though. > > Agreed, will update. Thanks Brian > > Regards > > Sara. > > _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
