IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2671bis-edns0-08.txt

"W.C.A. Wijngaards" <wouter@nlnetlabs.nl> Mon, 13 February 2012 13:05 UTC

Return-Path: <dnsext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@lists.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D91B621F854F; Mon, 13 Feb 2012 05:05:26 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1329138327; bh=rKb3xAbm3uK7o2rPilpTSHmPypp3UoP0c0lmRReuEw8=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:References:In-Reply-To: Subject:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help: List-Subscribe:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Sender; b=ScZK+Aa+gzQFEXxYQWCZrYvA20aEqrBBoYiGkgqsfsaNWfA02lWJKwQyen33VvE9a Qc4bC2C610UcKzlIt7dfGWUYNkyPM/daqymdd/QU5zcbsD9lXx7+1EQGH6PqhI1+Yq wvmXPqsNYzTIsCz43Y1X4ZIR2gMWY+2HWu3Q/3Cc=
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F40621F854F for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Feb 2012 05:05:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pBypf1NND2k2 for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Feb 2012 05:05:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from open.nlnetlabs.nl (open.nlnetlabs.nl [IPv6:2001:7b8:206:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DA9521F854D for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Feb 2012 05:05:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from axiom.nlnetlabs.nl (axiom.nlnetlabs.nl [IPv6:2001:7b8:206:1:222:4dff:fe55:4d46]) (authenticated bits=0) by open.nlnetlabs.nl (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q1DD5Ij0019355 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Feb 2012 14:05:20 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from wouter@nlnetlabs.nl)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=nlnetlabs.nl; s=default; t=1329138321; bh=B2l/asUaJOOYBuWQtF/VweL4dCTpsPi0Jg9TENHoE64=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=W14JHoc9zcvPff/4iMXzZVl3HcoIxwIQJVNmGonV+WZJyu/A7ziBiRv44S2qcault 92++VOQ8RGc0jngPgVPOyef3CHniRrYbiNpqlJdZi8BS+iSvLmtHuu6Ji+DX3o/kqJ asXAR4+ph2pBDATgYS9kZfy5PoByq9NFS96lU8js=
Message-ID: <4F390A8E.5050200@nlnetlabs.nl>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 14:05:18 +0100
From: "W.C.A. Wijngaards" <wouter@nlnetlabs.nl>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0) Gecko/20120131 Thunderbird/10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dnsext@ietf.org
References: <20120207130116.22821.43383.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4F344AD0.9040607@ogud.com>
In-Reply-To: <4F344AD0.9040607@ogud.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.5
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (open.nlnetlabs.nl [IPv6:2001:7b8:206:1::53]); Mon, 13 Feb 2012 14:05:20 +0100 (CET)
Subject: Re: [dnsext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2671bis-edns0-08.txt
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Olafur,

I have reviewed the document, and endorse it.

Could the authors put text in 6.1.1:
The OPT record is normally placed near the end of the additional section.

Because then there is guidance for the 'normal case'.

Why is: udpsize < 512 MUST be treated as 512 size?

s/udpates/updates/

Best regards,
   Wouter

On 02/09/2012 11:38 PM, Olafur Gudmundsson wrote:
> This draft closes all issues identified so far. The draft also
> addresses all Id-nits in prior version There is one change that was
> not included in the WGLC version but may have been inferred: The
> document Obsoletes RFC2673 Binary labels.
> 
> If anyone objects to this version being forwarded to the IESG
> please speak up now and we will start a short WGLC on that one
> issue.
> 
> thanks Olafur
> 
> On 07/02/2012 08:01, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
>> Title           : Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS0) Author(s)
>> : Joao Damas Michael Graff Paul Vixie Filename        :
>> draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2671bis-edns0-08.txt
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=bHP4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
dnsext mailing list
dnsext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email