Thanks for your review!
On Sep 15, 2023, at 12:39 PM, Vijay Gurbani via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Minor:
> - Global
> - I am surprised that the term "Round robin DNS" is not defined in this
> document. Is it worth defining? It is used quite a bit.
This is the first time someone has suggested this, even though you're right that it is a term we still sometimes here. I think it is unwise to add this this late in the review cycle (it's already on the telechat agenda, and a new definition would have to go back to the WG), but we'll try to remember it if there is a fourth edition of the doc.
> - S2, in the definition of "Global DNS", second paragraph: In the last
> sentence of the paragraph, you use "octet" and "byte" interchangably.
> Perhaps stick to octets as we are talking about a collection of eight
> bits on the wire.
Good catch. We use "octet" when that was in the original definition, and "byte" otherwise. We will add a note about this equivalence in the introduction.
> - S5, in the definition of EDNS, the text says, "...to indicate the version
> number." Is there a EDNS(1) (or EDNS1)?
No, not yet.
> I don't believe so, but it has
> been a while since I was caught up on latest work in DNS. AFAIK, it has
> always been called EDNS0, from back in rfc2671, RFC6891 continued with
> EDNS0 instead of EDNS1. Is it worth to provide historical perspective
> and say that till now, the version number has not changed since rfc2671?
It might be premature. The topic of "let's fix EDNS0" comes up occasionally, although so far has not progressed. I'd rather not have this document look like it is taking a stand at all.
> - S6, RDoT and ADoT: I do not believe that rfc7858 definies these terms.
> Is it worth referencing where these terms originated from?
We will make it clear that they came up informally, not in RFCs. (There is an RFC that is in front of the IESG simultaneous to this one that defines them, but that is not where they were first used.)
> Nits
> - S2, right above "Private DNS:", please expand PTI on first use.
Will do.
> - S3, in the definition of QNAME,
> s/this creates kind of confusion/this creates confusion/
> ("kind of" is okay for colloquial use, but not in standards documents.)
Agree.
Thanks!
--Paul Hoffman
--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
