On Sun, May 04, 2014 at 01:42:51PM -0400, Tim Wicinski <tjw.i...@gmail.com> wrote a message of 33 lines which said:
> Since this has been discussed several times and voted on during the > meetings, please *only* state if you think these are *not* ready for > publication, and your reasons. OK, then, I'll say nothing :-) There are a few bugs to fix: draft-ietf-dnsop-as112-dname-03 ******************************** 1) $ORIGIN 192.IN-ADDR.ARPA. 2.0.IN-ADDR.ARPA. IN DNAME EMPTY.AS112.ARPA. The second line should begin with "2.0.192.IN-ADDR.ARPA." or "2.0" 2) with the lowest 48 bits set to the value 1 To be consistent with IPv4, it should be the lowest 80 bits. Editorial: * a more flexibl approach -> flexible * A list of possible candidates for AS112 redirection can be found in Section 5 -> actually, no, it has been replaced by a reference to RFC 6303 * but /48 which has been unassigned and unadvertised -> but any /48 ... draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc6304bis-01 **************************** 1) exercising all three AS112 anycast name server addresses. All five (all four if you count only IPv4) _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
