Robert, thank you for your review(s), and Rik, thanks for the edits. Your proposed wording below works for me. Jari On 15 Dec 2015, at 21:20, Rik Ribbers <rik.ribbers@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Robert, > >> >> I also still think you would have a stronger document if it discussed the SHOULD NOT in the security section as I suggest below. I think you read that to be me suggesting you change it to MUST NOT. That was not the intent. I was asking you to add to the document _why_ it wasn't MUST NOT. > > I’ll take that into consideration, as I have explained it in the response the wording isn’t that difficult anymore. There are some more IESG review comment on this section so I assume there will another version to before publication. > > Current wording: > > A server SHOULD NOT perform any transformation on data under server management when processing a \<keyrelay:create\> command. > > Proposed wording: > > A server SHOULD NOT perform any transformation on data under server management when processing a \<keyrelay:create\> command. The intent of this command is to put DNSSEC key material on the poll queue of another client. To make sure that this EPP extension is interoperable with the different server policies that already have implemented EPP this extension it is not classified as must not. > > Please let me know what you think of this proposal (or send in text ;-)) > > Gr, > Rik
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail