Hi Francesca, thanks for your comments, please see below.
Francesca Palombini via Datatracker <nore...@ietf.org> writes: ... > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > DISCUSS: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Thank you for the work on this document. > > (This is a "let's talk" DISCUSS, which I don't expect to hold after the > telechat) I wonder if it wouldn't make sense to add a step where IANA gets the > help of the designated experts from each respective registry when elements are > added to the DNS class or RR type registries, either by the experts creating > the substatements to be added, or at least checking and confirming those > created by IANA. If you mean YANG expertise, then I believe it is already embodied in the XSLT stylesheet. In principle, IANA can run it after each change in the registry and get the new revision of the YANG module. > > A couple of minor comments below. > > Francesca > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 1. ----- > > models along with standard management protocols such as NETCONF and > RESTCONF can be effectively used in DNS operations, too. In fact, > > FP: Please expand NETCONF and RESTCONF on first use. I can do it for NETCONF but (to my knowledge) RESTCONF is the name of the protocol and no expansion exists. > > 2. ----- > > FP: I believe it would be good to add a sentence in the terminology section > stating that DNS terminology is used throughout the document, and point to RFC > 8499 and/or RFC 1035. I think informatively would be enough. OK, will do. Thanks, Lada > > > -- Ladislav Lhotka Head, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67 _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
