Document: draft-ietf-dnsext-axfr-clarify-13
Reviewer: Vijay K. Gurbani
Review Date: Mar-07-2010
IESG Telechat date: Mar-11-2010

Summary: This draft is ready for publication as a Proposed Standard.

It has 0 major issues, 0 minor issues and 3 nits.

Nits:

1/ S1.2 - What is meant by "non-DNS means"?  Do you mean
 accessing these databases using raw IP addresses?  Please
 add a sentence or two clarifying this.

2/ S1.4, last sentence of the section: suggest better to say,
 "The goal of this document is to define AXFR as it is
  understood by the DNS community to exist today."

3/ S2, last sentence on page 7: "They ought not to interfere
 with AXFR ..."  Is the interpretation here that the syntax
 and semantics of DNS messages should not interfere with
 AXFR but the authors are not sure this is indeed the case?

 In other words, why not write authoritatively: "The do not
 interfere with AXFR ..." instead of hedging your bets and
 saying "They ought not to ..."?