Tony I think my perspective is mainly from a CPE implementers point of view. Implementations are done by many third parties some who work with operators and some who do not. Guidance in a single document would be valuable.
John +1-484-962-0060 -----Original Message----- From: Tony Finch <fa...@hermes.cam.ac.uk> on behalf of Tony Finch <d...@dotat.at> Date: Tuesday, November 3, 2015 at 19:00 To: Alain Durand <alain.dur...@icann.org> Cc: Mark Andrews <ma...@isc.org>, Brian Haberman <br...@innovationslab.net>, "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>, Joel Jaeggli <joe...@bogus.com>, Fred Baker <f...@cisco.com>, "suns...@ietf.org" <suns...@ietf.org>, John Jason Brzozowski <john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com>, Paul Ebersman <paul_ebers...@cable.comcast.com>, Terry Manderson <terry.mander...@icann.org> Subject: Re: [DNSOP] New Version Notification for draft-jjmb-sunset4-dns-forwarding-ipv4aas-00.txt >Alain Durand <alain.dur...@icann.org> wrote: >> >> In the particular case of the communication between the CPE and the ISP >> DNS recursive resolver, the two parties are within the same >>administrative >> authority. Thus, the need to make a BCP is much lower. This can be seen >> as simply an implementation issue. > >But there needs to be a specification for interop between the CPE and the >ISP's network, so the ISP knows which suppliers they can buy equipment >from. > >Tony. >-- >f.anthony.n.finch <d...@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/ >Malin, Hebrides, Bailey, Fair Isle, Faeroes: South or southwest 4 or 5, >occasionally 6 at first, then becoming variable 3 or 4 later. Slight or >moderate in southeast Fair Isle, otherwise rough becoming moderate. Rain, >drizzle or showers. Good, occasionally poor. > _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
