On Sep 23, 2015, at 4:40 PM, Dave Lawrence wrote:
> Ted Lemon writes:
>> It would be helpful if the authors could explain why the REFUSED
>> response is being used here.
>
> Not to be glib, but because that's what Wilmer originally specified.
> That's thus what got implemented by the existing imp
On 24 Sep 2015, at 13:42, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Sep 23, 2015, at 4:40 PM, Dave Lawrence wrote:
>> Ted Lemon writes:
>>> It would be helpful if the authors could explain why the REFUSED
>>> response is being used here.
>>
>> Not to be glib, but because that's what Wilmer originally specified.
>> T
John Dickinson writes:
> I suggest that the IESG Note be moved to the main text and not be
> removed prior to publication.
I agree, and am making some edits today for review by the co-authors.
___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/m
On Sep 24, 2015, at 8:52 AM, John Dickinson wrote:
> I agree, when I last read this I had the IESG Note in my head (and I already
> knew that this was just documenting existing deployments). Looking again, I
> suggest that the IESG Note be moved to the main text and not be removed prior
> to pu
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations Working Group
of the IETF.
Title : DNS Terminology
Authors : Paul Hoffman
Andrew Sullivan
