Re: [DNSOP] rfc4641bis: NSEC vs NSEC3.

[Evan Hunt <[e-mail]>]

> I think Olafur's point is a good one, but I'm unhappy with the prose.
> Some suggested changes below.

Same here.

Nits:

> There are to mechanisms to provide authenticated proof of

s/to/two/

> Each mechanism includes a list of all the RRTYPEs present at the

s/includes/stores/

> > The clear text version has its one RRtype for negative answer, Clear  
> > text one uses NSEC record and the obfuscated one used NSEC3.
> 
> I didn't know how to rephrase that, because if I understand it I think
> what I understand is wrong (but that's obviously not the case, so
> probably I don't understand it).

I think he meant "each version has its own RRtype".  Suggested change:

"Each mechanism uses a specific RRTYPE to store information about the
RRTYPEs present at the name: the clear-text mechanism uses NSEC, and
the obfuscated-data mechanism uses NSEC3."

It may also be worth mentioning that the two mechanisms are usually
referred to by the names of their corresponding RR types.

--
Evan Hunt -- [e-mail]
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.