At 08:09 02-10-2012, John C Klensin wrote:
off bad or frivolous ideas), but closing is a big step. Telling
implementers that they don't need to pay attention to the
relevant codes and fields (and might even be able to use them
for a different, even if private, purpose) is an even more
serious step.
Yes.
In Section 6.1.2:
"OPTION-CODE
Assigned by the Expert Review process as defined by the dnsext
working group and the IESG."
It's odd to keep this defined by a working group which is being
closed. Section 9.1 does not provide much information. One
significant change in the draft is the inclusion of requirements for
"middleboxes". It's not mentioned under in Appendix A.2.
BTW, the RFC 2119 reference could be normative.
Regards,
-sm