Folks,
I'm responding to Murray's impressive proofreading details offlist, but
there are some points he raises that might need wg discussion:
On 7/18/2018 8:17 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
COMMENT:
The DNS is case-insensitive so this is a minor point, but would there be
any benefit to specifying that the registry only records the
all-lowercase version of an underscore name?
Mumble. The registry entries, of course, are not DNS entities. So
aspects of registry use might care, such as for comparisons.
And since uniqueness is the whole goal, forcing entries to use a single
case simplifies comparison. I'm inclined to do as Murray suggests.
COMMENT:
The text specifically calls for a stable reference. Do we have guidance
about what constitutes such a thing? I believe IANA has its own
guidelines to that end; are they available to the Designated Expert?
I'm inclined to let IANA raise this if they see and issue and then let
them drive the resolution of this point.
Section 6:
COMMENT:
I have doubts that SECDIR would accept this one-sentence comment. I
suggest saying something more specific, like:
"This document establishes a registry, and encourages a slight
reorganization of attributes stored in the DNS. It establishes no new
security issues."
The first clause is redundant and makes sense to have here only either
if the readers of this section haven't read the rest of the document, or
if the clause is useful to what follows. I believe neither applies here.
I don't understand the 'encourages' statement but suspect I don't agree.
That leaves language that is equivalent to the existing language...
Section 6.1:
COMMENT:
This seems to me to be content that belongs in its own section outside
of Section 6 since it doesn't seem to me to be a security issue, but
it's worth saying. Maybe give it its own section between what's now
Sections 3 and 4?
Well, I agree it's awkward where it is, but gosh. An entire major
section? For such a small and explanatory -- rather than
specification/normative bit of text? Mumble.
If no one minds, I would rather make it Section 1.4, just after the
sub-section tht describes the construct. I think it actually works well
there.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
