On 2.3.2017 19:00, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Mar 2017, Roy Arends wrote:
>
>> Implementer should follow spec. Spec sez MUST or SHOULD.
>
> Implementers may decide to implent some algorithms and not some others,
> depending on the level.
>
>> Now it says MUST- MUST+ MUST SHOULD- SHOULD+ a
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 of the IETF.
Title : A Common Operational Problem in DNS Servers - Failure
To Respond.
Author : M. Andrews
Fil
Added missing EDNS truncation behaviour test.
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org
___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/list
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 of the IETF.
Title : The ALT Special Use Top Level Domain
Authors : Warren Kumari
Andrew Sulli
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017, Petr Špaček wrote:
To improve the document I propose:
- somehow add shortened version of (sometimes implied) advices from 1.2.
Updating Algorithm Requirement Levels into SHOULD+/SHOULD-/MUST-
definitions in 2. Conventions Used in This Document.
Examples I would like to see:
Dear Tim Wicinski,
The session(s) that you have requested have been scheduled.
Below is the scheduled session information followed by
the original request.
dnsop Session 1 (2:00:00)
Monday, Afternoon Session I 1300-1500
Room Name: Zurich D size: 250
--
