Subject: [apps-discuss] Adrian Farrel's No Objection on draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-07: (with COMMENT)

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2014 13:37:45 -0700

Adrian Farrel has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-07: No Objection

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 http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I have no objection to the publication of this document and you'll 
probably call me picky when I point to the last line in Section 3.

   A domain MUST NOT advertise multiple MX RRs including a null MX.

That says one of two things:
1. You must not advertise multiple MX RR if any one of them is a 
   null MX.
2. You must not advertise more than one null MX, but may advertise one
   null MX along with other MX RRs.

I think you mean the former in which case...

   A domain that advertises a null MX MUST NOT advertise any other 
   MX RR.

But, if you meant the latter that could also be clarified.