1. Noted at
https://github.com/ietf-wg-add/draft-ietf-add-split-horizon-authority/issues/70
2. Approved
3. The current text is clear but not consistent: ".home.arpa" and ".local" are
written dot-first, and "resolver.arpa." and "ipv4only.arpa." are written
dot-last. I don't have a strong preference but we should use a single form
throughout this sentence.
4. Approved
5. This is not a list of definitions, so I am hesitant to use <dl>.
6. Do not change. The current quoting is correct.
7. I prefer option 2.
8. These references should both be changed to refer to the "ZONEMD Hash
Algorithms" registry and Section 5.3 of RFC 8976.
9. Approved
10. It means "It can be accomplished in this way, which is as straightforward
as one can reasonably hope for given the notoriously difficult technologies
that are involved". I welcome improved language.
11. Approved
12. The type should be "dns-rr".
13. Approved
14. For the sake of consistency, we should probably apply <tt> whenever a DNS
name is not in double-quotes. This would require two additional <tt> tags.
15. The two examples have since been combined. I propose to delete this text,
delete the "Split Horizon Entire Zone" section header, and retitle Section 8,
resulting in the following structure:
8. Example Split-Horizon DNS Configuration
8.1. Verification Using an External Resolver
...
Figure 3: Verifying claims using an external resolver
...
8.2. Verification using DNSSEC
...
Figure 4: An Example of Verifying Claims using DNSSEC -->
16. Yes, this spacing should be made consistent.
17. Let's change to ENCDNS_IP* for consistency.
18. Approved
19. Let's change to:
3. The old verification record needs to be maintained until the DHCP
lease or PvD Additional Information expires.
20. Let's change the titles of Sections 13.1 and 13.2 as follows:
13.1. New DHCP Authentication Algorithm for Split DNS
13.2. New PvD Additional Information Type for Split DNS
21. No Action.
22a. No Objection
22b. I think the existing usage is appropriate. "ds=..." appears in the first
usage in the section to remind the reader that this is a key-value pair", and
"ds" is used afterward as a shorthand.
22c(?). The "Verification Record" is a new technical artifact invented for this
specification. We should use consistent capitalization for it. I lean toward
capitalizing.
--Ben Schwartz
--
auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org
To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
