Hi Stephen, Stephen Morris wrote: > > Back in March, Martin Hoffman did a comprehensive review of the > RFC2845bis draft and made a number of very good suggestions for > improvements to its readability. I've edited the draft to take > account of his comments, something that has had a significant effect > on its structure.
Thank you for taking the time to rework the document -- and sorry for causing all this work. I do believe this is a much better document now! I have only one thing that I would like to see addressed: MD5 being mandatory. I asked back in March if we could make it optional and, as far as I remember, there was some agreement. Also, there are two requests for feedback in your comments to my comments, which I thought I keep here so that they become more visible: > > 6.5.3. Time Check and Error Handling > > > > o An actual protocol question: What is the point of the caching > > the last Time Signed per key and rejecting earlier messages? What > > about reordering of messages as can happen with UDP? > > Good question: thoughts? > > > > o What Fudge should the server use in its BADTIME response? > > I would presume that the Fudge field is not used when verifying the > error response so is irrelevant. However, is should be specified. > Thoughts? Kind regards, Martin _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
