Moin,

thanks for the review! Please find my responses inline.

> Nits:
> 
> s/recrusive/recursive/
> 
> s/...from resolving for clients.../...from being resolved for
> clients.../

These have already been addressed during an earlier review. Thanks
again, though, for pointing them out.

> s/If the name from an NS RR for a zone is sibling domain/If the name
> from an NS
> RR for a zone is (in?) sibling domain/

Thanks for spotting this; This has been addressed in the following PR:
https://github.com/ietf-wg-dnsop/draft-ietf-dnsop-3901bis/pull/62

> [...] These above statements appear somewhat contradictory. I'd tend
> to think that the first recommendation describes the ideal
> configuration, while the latter is a minimum requirement? It may be
> helpful to clarify this explicitly in the text to avoid confusion.

The above comment was already made in an earlier review. We plan to
address it with the following PR:
https://github.com/ietf-wg-dnsop/draft-ietf-dnsop-3901bis/pull/61


Thank you again for your detailed review.

With best regards,
Tobias

-- 
Dr.-Ing. Tobias Fiebig
T +31 616 80 98 99
M [email protected]
Pronouns: he/him/his

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

Reply via email to