On 3/25/14, 8:39 AM, Tim Wicinski wrote: > > > On 3/24/14, 1:48 PM, joel jaeggli wrote: >> On 3/19/14, 12:42 PM, Tim Wicinski wrote: >>> >>> 5. Address possible minor changes or extensions to the DNS Protocol, >>> initially with a focus on the operational impacts of these changes. Act >>> as clearinghouse or providing advice to ADs and other WGs on EDNS0 >>> options, new RRTYPEs, record synthesis, or other mechanics of extending >>> DNS to support other applications. >> >> I fell like this is intended to allow work on issues related to the >> root/tld registration but without being explicit. I'm a little on the >> fence with respect to how explicit we want to but I think we should >> actually call it out. >> > > We were trying to be explicitly vague, or vaguely explicit. I was > thinking we could say something like "such as root/tld conflicts or > namespace or application space conflicts". >
if I had to channel my other colleagues on the IESG it's probably important enough to warrant it's own bullet. I will ultimately get my own chance to whittle at the text so it's just a suggestion.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
