Hello Roman, we have now implemented your suggestion. The editorial issue should be resolved now:
https://github.com/ietf-wg-dnsop/draft-ietf-dnsop-3901bis/pull/77 We will try to submit a new ID with additional DISCUSS from other IESG members addressed before the telechat. With best regards, Tobias On Wed, 2026-01-21 at 06:54 -0800, Roman Danyliw via Datatracker wrote: > Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-dnsop-3901bis-11: Discuss > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut > this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to > https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ > > for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT > positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-3901bis/ > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > DISCUSS: > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > > ** Section 4.1. > Specifically, this means that > the following minimal requirements SHOULD be implemented for a > zone: > … > IPv4 adoption: > Every DNS zone SHOULD be served by at least two IPv4-reachable > authoritative DNS servers to maintain name space continuity. > The > delegation configuration (Resolution of the parent, resolution > of > sibling domain names, glue) MUST NOT rely on IPv6 connectivity > being available. Given the IPv4 address scarcity, operators > MAY > opt not to provide DNS services via IPv4, if they can ensure > that > all clients expected to resolve this zone do support DNS > resolution via IPv6. > > What does it mean to say that the “minimal requirements SHOULD be > implemented” > (which is specifying optional/recommended behavior) and then later > say “The > delegation configuration … MUST NOT rely …” (which is specifying > mandatory > behavior)? I think this might be a simple editorial fix. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > COMMENT: > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > > (Apologies to the WG for forgetting to click the "send email" button > for the > ballot originally issued for -10. This ballot is revised for -11. > Thank you > for updating the Section 4.1 text to remove the text starting with > "Given the > IPv4 address scarcity ..." which was in my -10 ballot). > > Thank you to Paul Kyzivat for the GENART Review. > > -- My working day may not be your working day. Please do not feel obliged to reply to my email outside of your normal working hours. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Tobias Fiebig, Forschungsgruppe Internet Architecture (INET) Max-Planck-Institut für Informatik, Campus E14, 66123 Saarbrücken E1 4 - Raum 517 mobil: +31 616 80 98 99 _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
