On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:19 PM, David Conrad wrote: > On Oct 20, 2011, at 6:07 PM, Keith Moore wrote: >> It might that IETF should consider "bare names" out of its scope, except >> perhaps to say that they're not DNS names, they don't have to necessarily be >> mappable to DNS names, and that their use and behavior is host and >> application-dependent. > > Can we please not redefine what a "DNS name" is to meet a particular agenda?
I wasn't trying to do so. > Isn't it sufficient to say a 'bare name' does not conform to a hostname as > defined in RFC 952 and modified by RFCs 1122? Probably. I'm just suggesting that trying to nail down the behavior of such names is probably a rathole as well as likely to cause significant disruption. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
