> Mark, Sam, > > It seems to me that a reference from the draft to the code > description or to Bind 9 more generally, with a note to the > effect that Bind 9 is believed to contain an implementation of > what is being described in the document, could head off a great > deal of confusion... including all of the confusion we have seen > in the last week or so. > > john BIND 9 currently implements only a single DLV tree for ".". The policy refects the intended state once lookups in multiple DLV trees are supported. > --On Tuesday, 31 October, 2006 08:42 +1100 Mark Andrews > <Mark_Andrews@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > The documents are essentially the same. In particular the > > policy to resolve the handling of multiple dlv namespaces > > which overlap is the same. This was not so in earlier > > versions. > > > > Mark > > > > -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews@xxxxxxx _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf