[DNSOP] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse-09: (with COMMENT)

[Mirja Kühlewind <[e-mail]>]

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse-09: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

One smallish, unimportant editorial comment:
In section 5, e.g.: "If the negative cache of the validating resolver has
sufficient
   information to validate the query, the resolver SHOULD use NSEC,
   NSEC3 and wildcard records aggressively."
it seems like the word "aggressive" has some meaning which was at least
not clear to me. Is there a difference in negative caching and aggressive
negative caching? If this word should provide any additional information
on what to do could you maybe further explain?