IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any

Ondřej Surý <ondrej.sury@nic.cz> Tue, 06 December 2016 12:17 UTC

Return-Path: <ondrej.sury@nic.cz>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4009D1299C2 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Dec 2016 04:17:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.896] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nic.cz
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id O6iDex4BR3K8 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Dec 2016 04:17:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B14A9129A12 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Dec 2016 04:17:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from zimbra.rfc1925.org (calcifer.labs.nic.cz [217.31.192.138]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4696D6105A; Tue, 6 Dec 2016 13:17:29 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1481026649; bh=d7ry3JYg7/u6kyCgIboiaX0Hu4Kywa6pcu8110MqBRY=; h=Date:From:To; b=cpk135nl5LedmFY3t8F2tkt68rBXqk3eZcSZoX9OOdUyAXWOOXZEK1pdeqrOhfX/B GxWVzLD/9qhP/i9oJHFnfTmQmGOZIvYdA7z8og9T9WV2jlXuTUcG9W+1I7jwK/sKSP E3aDFberFyYs9ixa0sD7J+yfdcnhO1mYAG3aV5IA=
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2016 13:17:29 +0100
From: Ondřej Surý <ondrej.sury@nic.cz>
To: 神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp>
Message-ID: <2069392990.3143.1481026649138.JavaMail.zimbra@nic.cz>
In-Reply-To: <CAJE_bqeXL9tqs8jf-S=LyEiTT0PG6z_ELTrDAiJW2u065FKARg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADyWQ+FwGf66+HL3W46C2d1BJZoyRxBDPPw8Yuup8k0Haise=g@mail.gmail.com> <CAJE_bqeXL9tqs8jf-S=LyEiTT0PG6z_ELTrDAiJW2u065FKARg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Originating-IP: [217.31.192.138]
X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.7.0_GA_1659 (ZimbraWebClient - FF50 (Linux)/8.7.0_GA_1659)
Thread-Topic: Working Group Last Call draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any
Thread-Index: AuFvVDd1J+taPKZx0XnYm+sHqx7qSQ==
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99.2 at mail
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/IsGzHcwTPC9sOfq2_DVm4WCFtAc>
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2016 12:17:38 -0000

----- Original Message -----
> From: "神明達哉" <jinmei@wide.ad.jp>
> To: "tjw ietf" <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
> Cc: "dnsop" <dnsop@ietf.org>
> Sent: Friday, 2 December, 2016 20:55:15
> Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call draft-ietf-dnsop-refuse-any

> - Section 3
> 
>   1.  A DNS responder can choose to select one or subset of RRSets at
>       the QNAME.
> 
>  'one or subset of RRSets' sounds a bit awkward to me, partly because
>  'a subset of RRSets' should include 'one of RRSets' and can thus be
>  redundant, and partly because 'subset of RRSets" might sound related
>  to 'subset of an RRSet' (it's actually "a subset of set of RRSets").
>  So I'd suggest changing this one of the following:
>  - "one or a few of RRSets (but not all of them)"
>  - "one or a few of RRSets"
>  - "a subset of RRSets"
>  I personally prefer the first most although it may be too verbose.


Just a nitpick about using "subset" in general - it should be either
"non-empty subset" (or something else) so I like "one or a few" more.

Cheers,
Ondrej

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status