Re: DNAMES Section4.4.4.htm

On 2007-06-25 23:29:05 +0200, Konrad Lanz wrote:

>>> * We should consider referencing RFC 2253 and also RFC 4514 (after 
>>> checking if they are no collateral effects).

>> So updated in the Editor's Draft.

> Can we be sure there aren't any problems by simply changing to
> RFC 4514 ? I'd hesitate to change this until we are entirely
> sure.

After reviewing the "changes" appendix of 4514, and the body of
normative text in the RFC, I seem to have convinced myself that the
change is harmless.  However, I'd welcome a second pair of eyes, so
you're welcome to do your own comparison.

-- 
Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>