Op 29 sep 2023 om 00:09 heeft Robert Edmonds het volgende
geschreven:
> noticed that Section 4 of the draft states:
>
> Firewalls that process DNS messages in order to eliminate unwanted
> traffic SHOULD treat messages with OPCODE = 0 and QDCOUNT > 1 as
> malformed traffic. See Section
Hi,
I noticed that Section 4 of the draft states:
Firewalls that process DNS messages in order to eliminate unwanted
traffic SHOULD treat messages with OPCODE = 0 and QDCOUNT > 1 as
malformed traffic. See Section 4 of [RFC8906] for further guidance.
However, I couldn't find the guidanc
Hi Tim,
On 28 Sep 2023, at 19:01, Tim Wicinski wrote:
> This starts a Call for Adoption for draft-bellis-dnsop-qdcount-is-one
>
>
> The draft is available here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bellis-dnsop-qdcount-is-one/
>
> Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitab
On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 1:00 PM Tim Wicinski wrote:
> Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption
> by DNSOP, and send any comments to the list, clearly stating your view.
>
> Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc.
>
I've read the dr
On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 10:00 AM Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> We want to thank Joe and Ray for getting this republished with the notes
> from the previous meeting.
>
> Thanks Ted and Eric for their comments today, we will remember them.
> I will say that this chair likes the appendix, to remind me wha
We want to thank Joe and Ray for getting this republished with the notes
from the previous meeting.
Thanks Ted and Eric for their comments today, we will remember them.
I will say that this chair likes the appendix, to remind me what I
have glossed over, as the authors have already corrected me on
Hi Eric,
On 28 Sep 2023, at 18:15, Eric Orth wrote:
> Minor remaining complaints (that I'm not going to fight over, so ignore if
> you really disagree):
> * I think all the stuff now in the appendix would be even better as a
> separate Informational draft. In my mind, appendix is acceptable,
I think this generally resolves my main concerns about the previous draft
hiding the normative changes behind all the history and justification.
Thanks for the update.
Minor remaining complaints (that I'm not going to fight over, so ignore if
you really disagree):
* I think all the stuff now in th
Hi,
The chairs have reviewed the discussion on this draft and find support for
adopting it as a Working Group document.
Thanks to everyone who commented and especially those who offered to review.
Authors, please submit a draft-ietf-dnsop version when you're ready.
Thanks,
Suzanne & Tim & Ben
Thanks Joe for pulling this together.
tim
On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 10:57 AM Ted Lemon wrote:
> Thanks for the update. I think this does the job. I could do without the
> appendix, but I understand the urge to fully document. :)
>
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 9:40 AM Joe Abley wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
Thanks for the update. I think this does the job. I could do without the
appendix, but I understand the urge to fully document. :)
On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 9:40 AM Joe Abley wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This version mainly incorporates feedback from the room at the last
> meeting and relate to document c
Hi all,
This version mainly incorporates feedback from the room at the last meeting and
relate to document clarity; the advice is unchanged.
Joe
> On 28 Sep 2023, at 15:21, internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote:
>
> Internet-Draft draft-bellis-dnsop-qdcount-is-one-01.txt is now available. It
> is a
Internet-Draft draft-bellis-dnsop-qdcount-is-one-01.txt is now available. It
is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations (DNSOP) WG of the IETF.
Title: In the DNS, QDCOUNT is (usually) One
Authors: Ray Bellis
Joe Abley
Name:draft-bellis-dnsop-qdcount-is-one-01.tx
13 matches
Mail list logo