On 3/5/2017 4:46 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
On reviewing the discussion history, I see some items for the list that I believe weren't resolved...
For those more interested in linguistic issues, as well as protocol details, there is a 'comment' in Introduction of the _Attrleaf draft that I'd like to get agreement on -- possibly with refinement -- and move from 'comment' to 'note':
The terms "resolution context" and "scoping rules" have been suggested, in place of "semantic scope". In order to avoid concern for matters of semantics, this specification uses the term "scoping rules", to create a focus on the mechanics being defined, rather than nuances of interpretation for the mechanism.
Comments? d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
