At Fri, 26 Apr 2019 09:16:58 +0200, Matthijs Mekking <matth...@pletterpet.nl> wrote:
> > Also, especially if both AAAA and A sibling records are available, > > what's the purpose of ANAME in the first place if it's (effectively) > > not used? > > > > I'm sure I'm just confused and don't understand the expected usage, > > but I can't figure it out from the available descriptions. Could you > > clarify it? > > Personally I agree that the purpose of ANAME becomes less useful with > choice #2. The difference is that you can set up ANAME for example for > AAAA only, or for A only. I don't know what the expected usage of that > is, and that is why I am asking on the list. If it turns out there is no > useful case, I think we should put text in the draft that says ANAME > takes precedence over sibling A and AAAA records. Okay. In that case I agree we should go for choice #1 (ANAME should be preferred) unless the expected usage for choice #2 is clarified and convinces us (the wg). Choice #2 looks awkward to me especially if we consider the case where both AAAA and A siblings exist. According to your original message choice #2 was derived from the behavior of a particular implementation: > Jan Včelák mentioned that at least NS1 uses a different order of > priority: If an sibling address record exists next to the ANAME it takes > precedence and no target lookup is done for that address record type. if there's a specific use case where this behavior is important, either the developer or user of this implementation should be able to clarify that. At least until we know that I don't see the point of considering this choice. -- JINMEI, Tatuya
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
