Re: [dispatch] New Version Notification - draft-hardie-dispatch-rfc3405-update-04.txt

Hi Timothy,

The two small changes done for this version were to respond to IESG
comments which sought to improve the clarity of the existing proposal; they
did not introduce new elements to the proposal in the document.  I think
your comments propose a much more significant change, and document updates
post-IESG processing is not the time for that type of change.  If you wish
to see other changes, I suggest you propose them in a new document.

regards,

Ted Hardie

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 12:33 PM Timothy Mcsweeney <tim@dropnumber.com>
wrote:

> I would like to see the following changes made to this version (-04)
> because it does not specify what will be exactly will be reviewed:
>
> 2. Updated Requirements
> This document removes and replaces the normative requirements from
> sections 3.1.1
> and section 3.1.2 of RFC3405 with:
> The registration of a NAPTR record for a URI scheme MUST NOT precede
> registration of that scheme.  IANA will review the request against for
>   1. correctness and technical soundness (eg. valid databases, service
> parameters etc.) and
>   2. consistency with the published URI resolution application
> specification [RFC3404], and
>   3. to ensure that the NAPTR record for a DNS-based URI does not delegate
> resolution of the URI to a party other than the holder of the DNS name.
> This last rule is to insure that a given URI's resolution hint doesn't
> hijack (inadvertently or otherwise) network traffic for a given domain.
>
> 3. IANA Considerations
>
> This update does not change the IANA submission procedure in Section 5 of
> RFC 3405.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list
> dispatch@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch
>
> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list
> dispatch@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch
>