Mark Delany writes: > On 26Mar15, David C Lawrence allegedly wrote: > > At IETF this week it was decided to refocus the effort on the > > edns-client-subnet draft on only documenting the existing behaviour of > > deployed implementations. > > That's disappointing and somewhat at odds with the theme of the > on-list discussions since the last draft was posted. Oh well.
I had meant to comment on this aspect in my message to dnsop; apologies for not doing so. The second half of this piece of news is that we will be advancing a new draft to work on improving the protocol based on operational experience, and will certainly be incorporating previous feedback. > > To clarify some areas that were un/under-specified I am looking for > > implementers of both recursive and authoritative servers at the > > Given that the major public caches have all adopted a whitelist > approach to participating auths, one presumes that their whitelists > represent all deployed implementations. Yes, in a sense. Not in a way that makes it easy for me to identify which implementations are which and who to talk to about them, unfortunately. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
