Eric Vyncke \(evyncke\) writes:
> Redirecting to [email protected], which is a more suitable place than the
> concluded dnsext WG.

I dunno what my standing is in this whole thing, but would like to
observe that when it went by in dnsext I thought to myself, "Yes, this
should be accepted."

> Reported by: Robert Edmonds <[email protected]>
> 
> This restores the definition of EDNS0's OPT CLASS field as "sender's UDP
> payload size" as it appeared in RFC 2671 rather than "requestor's UDP payload
> size" which appeared in RFC 6891 (specifically it appears to have been
> introduced in draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2671bis-edns0-02).

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to