Subject: [DNSOP] Terry Manderson's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-resolver-priming-09: (with COMMENT)

From: "Terry Manderson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 09:24:47 -0800

Terry Manderson has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dnsop-resolver-priming-09: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-resolver-priming/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for producing a well written artefact.

I also support Stephen's request to identify the scenarios in which "Some
implementers have chosen other directions, some of which work well and
others of which fail (sometimes disastrously) under different
conditions." An appendix would be fine IMHO.

Given you raise some (awareness) issues in the security consideration
section, if an administrator implements RFC7706 would that alter any of
those concerns? (admittedly, potentially buying others that are well
documented in 7706)