Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6840 (4191)

The errata is correct, but I agree with Donald - the old text is adequate 
and unlikely to lead to confusion.  (Well ... plenty of people are 
confused about this particular piece of the spec, but this clarification 
is unlikely to change that.  I am probably also biased, as the writer of 
that old text.)

I have no objection to marking this as verified, but I do not see it as 
necessary.

-- Sam

_______________________________________________
dnsext mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext