> -----Original Message----- > From: DNSOP <dnsop-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Wessels, Duane > Sent: Monday, May 1, 2023 12:43 PM > To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoff...@icann.org> > Cc: DNSOP Working Group <dnsop@ietf.org> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] WGLC rfc8499bis one week extension > for lame delegation definition > > Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click > links > or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is > safe. > > My preferred definition is the one originally given by Paul Vixie, amended by > myself, and further amended by Peter Thomassen: > > A lame delegation is said to exist when one or more authoritative servers > designated by the delegating NS rrset or by the child's apex NS rrset answers > non-authoritatively for a zone. > > I don’t think it is perfect, but it is an improvement. I don’t think > perfection will > be achievable.
[SAH] +1. Scott _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
