On 13. 07. 21 0:28, Warren Kumari wrote:
On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 6:18 PM Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
[ Resending complete message, previous draft was incomplete... ]
On 12 Jul 2021, at 11:18 am, Paul Hoffman wrote:
The current text is sufficient to tell resolver developers, and resolver
"
On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 6:18 PM Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>
> [ Resending complete message, previous draft was incomplete... ]
>
> > On 12 Jul 2021, at 11:18 am, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> >
> > The current text is sufficient to tell resolver developers, and resolver
> > operators, why they should
[ Resending complete message, previous draft was incomplete... ]
> On 12 Jul 2021, at 11:18 am, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>
> The current text is sufficient to tell resolver developers, and resolver
> operators, why they should even think about underscore labels when they
> create a QNAME
> On 12 Jul 2021, at 11:18 am, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>
> The current text is sufficient to tell resolver developers, and resolver
> operators, why they should even think about underscore labels when they
> create a QNAME minimisation strategy. Elevating such a strategy to a SHOULD
> as a
On 12. 07. 21 17:18, Paul Hoffman wrote:
The current text is sufficient to tell resolver developers, and resolver
operators, why they should even think about underscore labels when they create
a QNAME minimisation strategy. Elevating such a strategy to a SHOULD as a
work-around for broken
The current text is sufficient to tell resolver developers, and resolver
operators, why they should even think about underscore labels when they create
a QNAME minimisation strategy. Elevating such a strategy to a SHOULD as a
work-around for broken middleboxes that might (hopefully!) be fixed
