Re: About RFC 3761bis-07

Hi Lawrence,

thanks for putting this new revision together. I will give the WG a few
days to have a look at it in case somebody has comments (I will of
course also review this new version). After that, I will advance the
three documents in parallel.

Thanks,

Gonzalo


On 28/05/2010 2:13 PM, Lawrence Conroy wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>  To explain why we've issued a new version of 3761bis ...
> Gonzalo provided a detailed review of the current (-6) draft.
> 
> I do not believe that we have made any changes to the formal text.
> These changes are intended to clear up some of the text
> to make it easier to understand (and make it shorter).
> 
> In response, we produced this new version. 
> - (very slightly) tweaked the text of 1 (intro) to reflect what ENUM
>   does (or doesn't do). i.e. changed the statements that "ENUM stores
>   E.164 numbers in DNS" to "providing storage in DNS associated with
>   E.164 numbers".
>  - changed the Abstract to reflect that.
>  - tweaked the text of 1.2 to try to meet Gonzalo's review comment on it
>    and to make it a bit clearer what is required for non-E.164 numbers
>  - moved the arcane text that was paragraph 2 of section 2's introduction
>    into its own sub-section at the *end* of section 2 ("Collision Avoidance").
>  - removed some text copied from RFC 5483 and replaced with an informative
>    reference to that RFC.
> 
>  We've also:
>  - swapped around a couple of the items so the ORDER/PREF ones are all
>    together,
>  - have tried to answer Gonzalo's question "why is ORDER/PREF a problem?"
>    by splitting out the proposed default value as a separate item and
>    putting the (expanded) rest into an indented explanation following that,
>  - tagged on two items to nail down that you MUST sort using ORDER and
>    PREF, and you SHOULD NOT discard NAPTRs before they have been considered
>    (unless you have already selected one).
>  - corrected an bad typo in one of the items on ORDER/PREF (c/highest/lowest/)
> 
> 
> If there are any outstanding comments, please mail to the list (or the authors).
> 
> all the best,
>   Lawrence
> 
> _______________________________________________
> enum mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum
>