[DNSOP] Consensus suggestion for EDE and the TC bit

[Wes Hardaker <[e-mail]>]

During the first DNSOP meeting at IETF 106 there was a discussion that
had multiple opinions about what to do with setting the TC bit for EDE
information, which is generally supplemental.  During my presentation I
mentioned that an associate of Viktor suggested creating a new bit, and
during the conversation there was discrepancy about whether or not that
was a good idea.  Brian Dickson then proposed that the new bit only
modify future clients that wanted to use it, thus leaving the EDE spec
setting the TC bit.  A future bit could be defined that would indicate
that only supplemental information was dropped.

My proposal for EDE is that we follow this train of thought, which seems
to be the widest idea accepted from what I could tell.  TLDR for things
to do:

1. We have the EDE document say to set the TC bit (which it already did)
2. We create a new document that defines an extra bit for indicating
   that the dropped information was supplemental and didn't contain
   operationally important information.

If this sounds like a good compromise, great!  If you would like to
propose an alternative, great!  do so!

In the mean time, I threw together a quick ID for the new bit as well:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hardaker-dnsop-drop/

-- 
Wes Hardaker
USC/ISI