On Sun, Jan 07, 2018 at 08:26:46AM -0500, John Levine <jo...@taugh.com> wrote a message of 20 lines which said:
> It can coexist with anything other than CNAME, NS/DS, or another > DNAME, and you need A, AAAA, and MX records at the DNAME to do what > many people wrongly believe that DNAME does. See RFC 6672, sec 2.4. You're right, of course. Sorry for the mistake. It may be because I thought of only one use case (see below). > Not to be oversnarky, but I'd want a field to upload a picture of > the user shooting himself in the foot to demonstrate that he > understands what DNAMEs will do. Right. Warnings added <https://framagit.org/bortzmeyer/ietf-epp-dname/commit/bc4f697946848861ec62e14e710f10ef73f1241b> > I assume I missed a discussion of what problem this solves -- is it > in the list archives? Yes. Added to the future version of the draft but, basically, it is draft-bortzmeyer-dname-root. Some people remarked that we don't even have an EPP mapping for DNAME. It is not the biggest obstacle to draft-bortzmeyer-dname-root but this new draft draft-bortzmeyer-regext-epp-dname is an attempt to lift it. _______________________________________________ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
