>> 3) Mark Andrews' suggestion of further requirements regarding EDNS0 has >> not been discussed, but I would note that at this stage we should not add >> major requirements without substantial community portion indicating that >> this is needed. I'm not hearing it. > > I suspect this is because the root servers actually correctly > implement EDNS. If a server was changed to a implementation that > failed to correctly implement EDNS that would change. Perhaps. What do others think? Jari
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail