[DNSOP] Re: Conclusion and request for action after AD revie w of draft-ietf-dnsop-structured-dns-error-20
Vladimír Čunát <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.dnsop |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 09/06/2026 10.10, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote: > Per [1], why not a MUST (my preference but up to you) or providing the > required guidance for the "SHOULD" in: > To avoid exceeding the maximum EDNS0 size [RFC9715] the generated > JSON values *SHOULD* be as short as possible: [...] In my eyes, "as short as possible" and the following text have a fairly fuzzy meaning, except the JSON-minifcation part, so I'm not sure if MUST vs. SHOULD makes a practical difference when formulated this way. Also note that the server producing this structured error does know limitations on the overall size of that particular DNS message. (if it's going over plain UDP, they've already "negotiated" the limit size) Though it might be impractical/complicated to make such a decision dynamically. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]