[DNSOP] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-13: (with COMMENT)

Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-13: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer

Re: [DNSOP] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel-15

Hi Jari, thanks for spending the time and doing this review. in response to the points you raise: 1. Jargon is just a constant factor in this space, and yes, the use of “CD bit” snuck in with either a reference to an explanation. I’ll uzse a reference to section 3.2.2 of RFC4035 2. your secon

Re: [DNSOP] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-dnsop-kskroll-sentinel-15

Thanks for the responses, Geoff. One minor follow-up: > The final point I am not so convinced about. The reason is scope of the > document. This document is an instruction to folk who write DNS recursive > resolvers. It is not an instruction to folk who want to set up zones that > could be us