On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 03:52:22PM -0500, Ben Schwartz wrote:
[ Sorry about the delayed response, on the road since Dec 24th... ]
> I don't want this draft to become an omnibus update to RFC 7671. My goal
> is to produce a short draft that is basically parallel to RFC 7673.
>
> If you want to
Paul Wouters wrote on 2022-01-06 18:14:
On Jan 6, 2022, at 20:48, Paul Vixie wrote:
George Michaelson wrote on 2022-01-06 16:50:
for a 200 in 200,000,000 problem? Ban it.
i agree that we should ban it, but not on the basis of its infrequency of use.
rather, on the basis of data
It appears that Paul Wouters said:
>On Jan 6, 2022, at 20:48, Paul Vixie wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> George Michaelson wrote on 2022-01-06 16:50:
>>> for a 200 in 200,000,000 problem? Ban it.
>>
>> i agree that we should ban it, but not on the basis of its infrequency of
>> use. rather, on the
On Jan 6, 2022, at 20:48, Paul Vixie wrote:
>
>
>
> George Michaelson wrote on 2022-01-06 16:50:
>> for a 200 in 200,000,000 problem? Ban it.
>
> i agree that we should ban it, but not on the basis of its infrequency of
> use. rather, on the basis of data provenance.
Who wants to be the
George Michaelson wrote on 2022-01-06 16:50:
for a 200 in 200,000,000 problem? Ban it.
i agree that we should ban it, but not on the basis of its infrequency
of use. rather, on the basis of data provenance. let me explain.
an iterator has no reason to believe adobe.net's servers as to
for a 200 in 200,000,000 problem? Ban it.
-G
On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 9:46 AM Wessels, Duane
wrote:
>
> In order to make progress on the glue-is-not-optional draft, we need the
> working group to reach consensus on the requirement level for sibling glue
> (MUST, SHOULD, or MAY).
>
> The only
It appears that Wessels, Duane said:
>In order to make progress on the glue-is-not-optional draft, we need the
>working group to reach consensus on the requirement level
>for sibling glue (MUST, SHOULD, or MAY).
>
>The only situation in which a failure to include sibling glue leads to a
In order to make progress on the glue-is-not-optional draft, we need the
working group to reach consensus on the requirement level for sibling glue
(MUST, SHOULD, or MAY).
The only situation in which a failure to include sibling glue leads to a
resolution failure is when there is a sibling
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations WG of the IETF.
Title : DNS Transport over TCP - Operational Requirements
Authors : John Kristoff
