> whether the scope of rfc6125bis draft should be broaden
to include non-domain names, like IP addresses
(at the cost of delaying its publication) or this issue
should be addressed in a separate document.
I am slightly opposed. My concern is not the delay in publication, but in
merging the two concepts -- domain names and IP addresses -- into one set of
rules. First, I don't believe Martin's assertion that IP-ID are very popular;
we haven't seen them at Akamai, does he have Mozilla telemetry to back this up?
Second, the clear and simple language in the document has to change a fair
amount. Martin's PR is only a sketch. It doesn't cover, for example, what
changes need to be made to
https://richsalz.github.io/draft-ietf-uta-rfc6125bis/draft-ietf-uta-rfc6125bis.html#name-overview-of-recommendations
Taken together, I think adding IP-ID is a corner case that will make the common
case harder to understand and implement.
_______________________________________________
Uta mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
