On 11/05/2021 18.17, Wes Hardaker wrote:
I'd also expect something on limits accepted by secondaries. And some
details are probably up to further discussion (e.g. particular numbers
and SERVFAIL), but I don't think such details would block adoption.
That's certainly an interesting thing to think about, but it starts to
get in between the relationship of primaries and secondaries. Is that
something that should be "standardized"?
I'm not really a good person to ask about these relationships. Anyway,
if some values were to get standardized to cause SERVFAIL in validators,
I would expect also secondaries to refuse them, though perhaps that's
more of an advice or setting expectations (contrary to the validator
part which I consider an incompatible change in protocol). Naturally,
signers should be at least as strict, too, e.g. refuse to go in the
range that gets standardized to cause a downgrade.
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
