On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 07:12:21PM +0200, P Vixie wrote: > Ouch. Well so if a large body of ietf participators think wide area rdns is a > bad idea and that this option should never be recommended then we would > presumably have to say so in the document which standardized the option. > Strange. >
No, Informational status is still available. There's nothing wrong with that. Also, however, it seems to me that even if this went up on the Standards track, one wouldn't have to say whether it was a good idea. But you _could_ write a separate doc (and try to get it published or else publish it on the Independent stream) that said, "Wide Area Recursive DNS Considered Harmful." I think that's a separate question from, "How to deliver topological information from a recursive server to an authoritative?" A -- Andrew Sullivan a...@anvilwalrusden.com _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
