Thanks Florian, don't worry. The FLAG section was just introduced in last versions and was victim of over-edition ;) We agree with your suggestions, they add clarity to the specfication, and have prepared a -04 version with these changes.
Regards, Hugo On 12:39 01/08, Florian Obser wrote: > Sorry for being very late. > > I find the usage of FLAG- weird. > > I think FLAG-LABELS should just be LABELS or LABELCOUNT. > > What really tripped me was FLAG-NUMBER. It is introduced in section 2, > without any indication what it does. I think it should be called TYPE, a > flag is a thing that's "on" or "off", but this is not. What's called > FLAG-NUMBER distinguishes the type of FLAG-DATA. > > I don't think we need FLAG-LENGTH at all, it follows trivially from the > EDNS0 OPTION-LENGTH. > > FLAG-DATA could be called VERSIONDATA. > > Again, sorry for being late, > Florian > -- > In my defence, I have been left unsupervised. > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
