Hi Ketan, Thanks for your review. My comments are below.
> On 14 May 2026, at 12:33 pm, Ketan Talaulikar via Datatracker > <[email protected]> wrote: > > [snip] > > 1) Section 4.2 says "As a result, RDAP clients which use these frameworks may > SHOULD explicitly carve out the "values" property of "ttl0_data" elements." > ... > I am guessing this is just a "SHOULD" and not a "may SHOULD" ? This was already picked up by Med, and will be fixed in the next version. > 2) RFC9499 perhaps needs to be a normative reference since it describes the > TTL > term that is used in the context of this document? I don't know enough of the > provenance of DNS documents and terminologies and hence providing as a comment > for the authors/WG and others to consider. I'm happy to make this change. G. -- Gavin Brown Principal Engineer, Global Domains & Strategy Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) https://www.icann.org _______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
