- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sun, 04 Apr 2004 21:18:32 +0200
- To: Jason Crawford <ccjason@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: nnw3c-dist-auth___at___w3.org@smallcue.com
Jason Crawford wrote: > We've addressed all issues brought up, right? Count me as +1. We did. Basically the issues raised here fell into three categories...: 1) Specific problems in the spec (those have been resolved in draft 05 that we'd like to last-call). 2) General problems with the reference model introduced by the spec: the BIND spec specifies a very specific model; and this is the model it was supposed to specify. There are other possible models that behave slighty differently. One of them is the redirect reference model (separate spec), another is the "direct reference model" (that was mentioned in earlier versions of the REDIRECT spec, but as far as I can tell, nobody was interested to work on). There hasn't been any new discussion on this topic since Geoff's and my answers, so I'll assume it's resolved. 3) Issues with the organization and writing style of the spec. BIND adopts the same editorial style as RFC3253; and as there has been only one WG member finding problems with that, it seems that there's no change necessary. If more people feel differently about that, please speak up. That being said, the draft really should be last-called -- it has been in this close-to-be-last-called state for quite some time now. Regards, Julian -- <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Sunday, 4 April 2004 15:20:45 UTC