Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dnsop-maintain-ds-03: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-maintain-ds/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I understand why most of the 2119 language appears in this draft, but the SHOULDs in this text Users SHOULD keep in mind that re-establishing trust in delegation can be hard and takes a long time. Before deciding to complete the rollover via an unsigned state, all options SHOULD be considered. don't look like 2119 SHOULDs to me. I also note that there's a SHOULD in section 1.2, but 2119 terminology isn't introduced until section 1.4 (easy enough to fix, by moving section 1.4 up, but). _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
