[DNSOP] Moving forward with DNS Stateful Operations

[Ted Lemon <[e-mail]>]

We got some really good review during the IESG last call process.   Thanks
to the IESG members (bcc) who read the document thoroughly and gave so many
thoughtful comments.

I believe that we have addressed all of the comments that were made during
the review adequately.  However, this hasn't been thoroughly reviewed; we
should do a thorough review of these changes.   In order to facilitate
that, I've submitted a -14 (on top of last night's -13), so the diffs to
look at are between -12 and -14, not, e.g., just -13 and -14.   You can get
the diffs here:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dnsop-session-signal-14&url1=draft-ietf-dnsop-session-signal-12

Note that because I added an applicability section, all of the IESG
comments about sections after 4 are off by one.

 The one remaining nit is that at least two and possibly three of the ADs
commented that the terminology section has a lot of normative language in
it and generally talks a lot about things that are really specification,
not terminology.

I responded to this by saying that we'd discussed this as a group, agreed
it wasn't great, and decided it was more work to fix than it was worth.
 However, at the moment I actually have a lot of state on this document in
my head, and I think I could fix this without it being too much work or
introducing errors.   But doing so would impose extra workload at least on
the authors, and maybe on the working group, to review the changes I make
and make sure I don't screw something up.

Is there appetite for doing this?   I think it would significantly improve
the document, but I am mindful of the expense.