Re: [DNSOP] draft-jabley-dnsop-ordered-answers

["Joe Abley" <[e-mail]>]

On 5 Nov 2015, at 10:54, Niall O'Reilly wrote:

> On Thu, 05 Nov 2015 13:26:22 +0000,
> Ray Bellis wrote:
>>
>> IMHO, if a clarification is needed, it's that a client that depends 
>> on
>> the order of the RRsets in an answer MUST NOT do so.
>
> Wouldn't it be a simpler clarification to say that a client MUST NOT
> depend on the order of the RRsets in an answer?

Sure, the solution could be any number of things.

But what I heard clearly in the room (and what I saw on the mailing 
list) is that there are multiple interpretations of the base spec, and 
that there is deployed code that breaks as a result. This to me suggests 
a need for clarification, regardless of what the clarification says.

Given that perspective, I remain confused as to why there was a strong 
hum against providing clarification. It does seem possible that people 
were humming against the specific proposal in the document, and not the 
need for clarification in general.

As I mentioned before I'm not trying to beat a dead horse, here. I just 
want to make sure I understand what question people thought they were 
being asked.


Joe