Matthew Pounsett wrote:
there's a carrier wave in that time series, which has its own wave
form. at the end of each epoch, we'll be back where we are today,
without a coherent or complete document set. we'd be moving from
failing to plan, to planning to fail. let's make a better
Tony Finch wrote:
Paul Vixie wrote:
devices which cannot be updated by their makers must expire
Definitely.
I think the problem that most concerns me is the device that spends 3 or 6
months in a box between manufacturing and deployment, and which expects to
do a software update when it is
On 03/31/2018 07:34 PM, Mukund Sivaraman wrote:
> All the clarifications RFCs such as NCACHE 2308, 2181, wildcards 4592,
> etc. I'd also expect TSIG, AXFR, IXFR and UPDATE to get treatment in
> "core" DNS in the same grouping as master files.
>
Just offhand, IPv6 stuff should be merged and cons
On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 11:34:29PM +0200, bert hubert wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 01, 2018 at 02:39:06AM +0530, Mukund Sivaraman wrote:
> > Just a "guide to the RFCs" won't be sufficient. Language has to be
> > corrected; large parts of RFC 1034 and 1035 have to be rewritten and
> > restructured, incorpor
Paul Vixie wrote:
>
> devices which cannot be updated by their makers must expire
Definitely.
I think the problem that most concerns me is the device that spends 3 or 6
months in a box between manufacturing and deployment, and which expects to
do a software update when it is plugged in, but ther
On 31 March 2018 at 17:27, Paul Vixie wrote:
>
>
>>
>> I think the RFC series as a whole needs to contain both, but I'm not
>> saying that both should exist simultaneously for any given set of
>> documents within the RFC series.
>>
>
> i think you are.
I'm really not.
>
>
> I think we've reac
On Sun, Apr 01, 2018 at 02:39:06AM +0530, Mukund Sivaraman wrote:
> Just a "guide to the RFCs" won't be sufficient. Language has to be
> corrected; large parts of RFC 1034 and 1035 have to be rewritten and
> restructured, incorporating clarifications from newer RFCs. It would be
> a big work, but I
Matthew Pounsett wrote:
On 28 March 2018 at 14:48, Paul Vixie mailto:p...@redbarn.org>> wrote:
matt, the rfc document set is innately time-series. this was seen as
a strength compared to some "document set in the sky" that would be
updated periodically with lineouts and additions
On 28 March 2018 at 14:48, Paul Vixie wrote:
> matt, the rfc document set is innately time-series. this was seen as a
> strength compared to some "document set in the sky" that would be updated
> periodically with lineouts and additions, like for example legal codes or
> the ARIN PPML. i think yo
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 04:38:24AM -0400, Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
> I have looked at the same problem Bert has, but he did present it much
> better than I could. When I started thinking about this, I approached it
> from the point of view of "If I have to give a co-worker a document on how
> to bui
what this means is, if someone sees _TCP in use for some rr type, and they
needed something like this for their own new rr type, they should be
encouraged to either use _TCP if they find it's the best fit, or use
something else if they find that a best fit. they should not worry either
away abo
John R. Levine wrote:
Catching up:
...
if you view the use of _tcp by more than one rrtype as a coincidence
rather than as evidence for the need for a registry, then we can
simply define the global registry out of existence (where it has been
until now) and ensure that every rrtype's registry
On 3/31/2018 9:08 AM, John R. Levine wrote:
On Fri, 30 Mar 2018, Dave Crocker wrote:
but I can't figure exactly how, nor how to resolve drawing the global
value from two independent namespaces...
But this ignores handling names from enumservice.
Thoughts? Suggestion? Text?
Add URI entries
On Fri, 30 Mar 2018, Dave Crocker wrote:
what that means. (Nor of "ENUMService Parameter".) I assume it is meant to
draw from
https://www.iana.org/assignments/enum-services/enum-services.xhtml#enum-services-1
Agreed.
but I can't figure exactly how, nor how to resolve drawing the global valu
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations WG of the IETF.
Title : DNS Scoped Data Through '_Underscore' Naming of
Attribute Leaves
Author : Dave Crocker
Catching up:
Assuming we agree that the table also says where to find the registry
for second level names, this removes and need for special cases. The top
level names _tcp _udp _sctp _dccp all work for SRV and URI and take
service names on the second level.
if you view the use of _tcp by
16 matches
Mail list logo
