Re: [dhcwg] dhc WG last call on <draft-ietf-dhc-ddns-resolution-09.txt>

I don't agree with the changed text about the order in which updates  
should be done.   The draft should specify one or the other.   I  
agree that my long rationale (rationalization) shouldn't be  
included.   The reason for specifying one or the other is not that  
one is more correct than the other - as my rationalization  
demonstrated, they are largely equivalent.   The reason for  
specifying one is to avoid saying "just do what you want."   We  
shouldn't say things like that in a protocol specification, because  
the reader may not understand the problem sufficiently to do what is  
required.

The change regarding secure DNS is fine.   You could also just take  
that out - I think it's self-evident.   But don't - the fewer changes  
that are made to the draft, the better.

Agree that it's unlikely that the A and AAAA will be updated at the  
same time, even if you have a dual-stack DHCP client, because the  
DHCPv4 and DHCPv6 responses will naturally come at different times.    
It is, however, possible, particularly during the transition to v6,  
that there will be both an A and an AAAA record, albeit as a result  
of separate updates.

Anyway, much as I hate to say it, I think that the change to the  
protocol I talked about at the beginning of this message needs to be  
fixed before this draft can proceed through last call.   I really  
hate to say that, because I think this spec needs to move forward.    
Please let this be a lesson to the last minute tweakers in the studio  
audience - a change that makes no difference should not be made,  
because it might be made wrong, and this creates delay.

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg