> > Now when I see that this kind of problems is real, it is probably the > right time to ask Geoff to use his tools and get some data from large > scale measurement... > > Underscore is now out of the question because we know about the > Android/Chrome problem se might test alternative labels. > > ??-- variant is out of question because it goest against > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5891#section-5.4 > > So, to have something realistic and testable, I propse to use strings: > > test-name-rfcXXXX-dnssec-root-trust-anchor-key-trusted-yes-0000 > (63 octets, unlikely to colide with anything, self-explanatory) > test-name-rfcXXXX-dnssec-root-trust-anchor-key-trusted-no-0000 > (62 octets) > > Opinions? > > Geoff, is it realistic to test that clients are able to resolve A > records containing these leftmost labels? >
It is an interesting question, and one we should probably measure. My outstanding question is to Paul Hoffman (and anyone else who caress): if not underscores and IF “xm—“ as a leading substring is not acceptable for some reason, then what label format would be acceptable for this measure? thanks Geoff _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
