(1) RFC is Standards Track, and this is the correct RFC type.
(2)
Technical Summary:
This document describes a method for automatic DNS zone provisioning
among DNS primary and secondary nameservers by storing and
transferring the catalog of zones to be provisioned as one or more
regular DNS zones.
Working Group Summary:
WG worked and collabrated on resolving any and all isssues. No rough consenus.
Document Quality:
Appendix A points out there are several implementations that interact successfully.
Personnel:
Document Shepherd: Tim Wicinski
Responsible Area Director: Warren Kumari
(3) The Document Shepherd did a detailed review of the document
for content as well as simple editorial checks (spelling/grammar).
The shepherd feels the document is ready for publication.
(4) The Document Shepherd has no concerns on the depth or breadth
of the reviews.
(5) There is no need for broader review.
(6) There are no concerns from the document shepherd.
(7) No IPR disclosures
(8) There is no IPR
(9) The WG Consensus on this document is very solid.
(10) There has been no appeals.
(11) All nits found have been addressed by the authors.
(12) No formal review needed
(13) All references have been identified as normative or informative.
(14) All normative references are in a clear state.
(15) There are no downward normative references
(16) This document will update RFC7873, and it is in the abstract and the
introduction.
(17) The document shepherd confirmed the consistency and references of the
IANA Considerations section are accurate
(18) No new IANA registries
(19) No Automated checks needed
(20) No Yang