>It's clear from the context that 6844 §5.1 is talking about the wire >format, while §5.1.1 is talking about the presentation format. If the >rules for the canonical presentation format are stricter than the rules >for the wire format, then there exist wire RRs that cannot be >represented using the canonical presentation format. Which, the >verifier's notes in erratum 4061 claim, is OK, and not a contradiction.
I have to agree with Mark's main point here -- master files are just as much a part of the DNS as wire format, and there needs to be a consistent two-way mapping between master files and wire format DNS zones. it's also true that DNS servers (not just BIND) reject an entire master file if there are any syntax errors at all, so a little fuzziness is not harmless. In this case, the simplest fix appears to make the two parts of section 5.1 consistent and both say that tags can only contain letters and digits. R's, John _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
