[dns-operations] RRL specified in a stable place?

[Edward Lewis]

Why an IETF document?  In what way does Response Rate Limiting impact interoperability of implementations?

If this is not an independent submission, how does it fit into a working group?  The implementations are pretty much out there, what's to work on?

I understand that would be useful is a reference-able document describing the RRL.  That is, something stable and reviewed - and that could be an RFC.   But an RFC does not have to come through the IETF.

On Feb 4, 2013, at 14:39, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 10:54:36AM -0800, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>> We now have two implementation of response rate limiting (RRL). In order for it to be widely adopted, an Internet-Draft followed by an RFC would be Really Helpful.
> What track do you expect this to go along?  Is this a DNSOP draft?

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis             
NeuStar                    You can leave a voice message at +1-571-434-5468

There are no answers - just tradeoffs, decisions, and responses.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.dns-oarc.net/pipermail/dns-operations/attachments/20130204/d358b015/attachment.html>