Re: [DNSOP] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-11

"Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Fri, 10 August 2018 14:55 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
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 DC83E1277C8 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 07:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 obQ_niBQa0qE for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 07:55:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 977DF128CF3 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 07:55:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.32.60.104] (50-1-51-141.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.51.141]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.proper.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id w7AEsfox072783 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 10 Aug 2018 07:54:43 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: mail.proper.com: Host 50-1-51-141.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.51.141] claimed to be [10.32.60.104]
From: "Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
To: "Giovane C. M. Moura" <giovane.moura@sidn.nl>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 07:55:00 -0700
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.11.3r5509)
Message-ID: <995D9662-F08D-4497-8D86-4BE2502EF412@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <E6DE5965-4390-4C0A-86E9-B5B7A333EA04@vpnc.org>
References: <153373205122.6368.16143820330220001109@ietfa.amsl.com> <C8F7BE0B-07B2-43F7-9710-06C0C05EDDAC@icann.org> <6E58094ECC8D8344914996DAD28F1CCD8BB306@DGGEMM506-MBX.china.huawei.com> <1c46806e-9e80-a14f-4f6b-44239e27e31d@sidn.nl> <E6DE5965-4390-4C0A-86E9-B5B7A333EA04@vpnc.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/QQaYmbKWZPCM0escJ8_MQ-UZiNs>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-11
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 14:55:05 -0000

Also, in searching for "answer" in the document, I find that most of the 
uses are as a verb, which is unambiguous. It's only ambiguous when the 
word "answer" is used as a noun. Unfortunately, there are some places 
where "answer" as a noun is used in material we quote from other RFCs, 
and we cannot change those.

--Paul Hoffman