Subject: Editorial nit: location of canonical ordering definition

From: Roy Badami <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 03:09:37 +0100

My gut feeling is that -records sections 6 should be transplanted
wholesale into -protocol instead.  The canonical ordering isn't
anything to do with the records per se, and to my mind in very much
part of the protocol....

I realize this is a subjective issue, and others may disagree.

  -roy

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

---

From: Rob Austein <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 22:35:06 -0400

> I realize this is a subjective issue, and others may disagree.

<hat editor=off just-another-bozo=on>

  I disagree.  The cannoical ordering definitions are required to
  understand what goes in the RDATA fields of the RRSIG and NSEC RR
  types defined in -records.  In particular: section 6.1 is required
  to understand section 4.1.1, and sections 6.2 and 6.3 are required
  to understand section 3.1.8.1.

</hat>