Other parts of the doc say that some rr types are class specific and others are
universal. There an implication that class affects rdata format within a
universal rr type. It's incoherent as hell. The reason we don't use it is it's
poor definition. Incompatible implmentations could all be right
Did you hear the part about doing it the way we did when deprecation iquery?
There's a discovery and decision process that involves the broader community.
Technical merit was provided. Sad that I can't think of a way to do it more
clearly.
On March 23, 2018 7:18:25 PM UTC, "Ondřej Surý" wrote:
Harmonization for the sake of harmonization is bad, and very little Internet
System technology gets it. Just do new stuff better.
On March 20, 2018 6:11:08 PM UTC, "John R. Levine" wrote:
>After some back and forth with Dave, I realized I missed what seems to
>be
>to be a large change: this dra
When Ed have up defending the qtuple, complexity moved in.
On March 20, 2018 4:04:31 PM UTC, Joao Damas wrote:
>Camels are indeed great animals and they can be loaded until eventually
>one more insignificant straw breaks their back. I guess that is were
>Bert thinks the DNS is at now and I don’t
No cc. I call them full resolved not recursive resolvers. I thought 1034 also
did.
On March 12, 2018 3:09:27 PM UTC, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>Greetings. The definition of "recursive resolver" has been problematic
>both in RFC 7719 and in draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis. Section 6 of
>draft-ietf-d
nt of the
existing document then please write nothing at all.
On November 29, 2017 8:28:11 PM GMT+08:00, Andrew Sullivan
wrote:
>On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:23:36PM +0000, P Vix wrote:
>> 1034 cannot be reasonably read that way.
>
>Sure it can. See the discussion in draft-sullivan-d
1034 cannot be reasonably read that way. I am asking for a clarification not a
rule change.
On November 29, 2017 8:21:01 PM GMT+08:00, Andrew Sullivan
wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 07:08:01PM -0800, Paul Vixie wrote:
>> that's fatally unclear.
>
>So I gather :)
>
>> then the thing to say wou
Exactly.
On November 27, 2017 9:22:51 PM GMT+08:00, Tony Finch wrote:
>Joe Abley wrote:
>> On Nov 23, 2017, at 12:44, Tony Finch wrote:
>>
>> > It's quite difficult to have multiple masters and DNSSEC and
>coherent
>> > copies of the zone from all masters - i.e. more effort than just
>spinning
On November 14, 2017 9:13:29 PM PST, Dave Lawrence wrote:
>Paul Vixie writes:
>> i'm of the opposite view. we should not change behaviour without
>> explicit signaling. if that means it takes 10 years to reach 50%
>> penetration, like EDNS did, then that's the cost of doing business.
>
>Just s
On September 22, 2017 9:58:42 AM EDT, Andrew Sullivan
wrote:
>On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 07:31:29PM -0700, Paul Vixie wrote:
>
>[…]
>
>> we need a kernel option for various open source operating systems
>which
>> causes all UDP to be fragmented at 512 octets of payload.
>
>If working on a protocol
We might want to invent a new term here like effective qname, but basically I
agree with Mark. 2308 was written after bind itself learned the distinction.
On August 24, 2017 3:27:34 PM PDT, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
>RFC 2308 is consistent with RFC 1034.
>
>Go read *all* of RFC 1034. QNAME is used
This is why rfc 2308 definition of qname is correct.
On August 24, 2017 9:46:58 AM MDT, Hector Santos wrote:
>I have a question related to RFC2317 "Classless IN-ADDR.ARPA
>delegation."
>
>Earlier this year, I switched from a class C bank of 256 addresses to
>a reduced set of 32 ips (/27). To g
+1
On July 11, 2017 3:17:57 PM GMT+08:00, "Petr Špaček" wrote:
>Hello dnsop,
>
>reading throught the latest version, I object to the proposed TLV
>format.
>
>I feel that implications from switch to non-RR format are
>underestimated
>and following e-mail attempts to explain why I believe it is a b
I accept Warren's alternative wording. Any of them.
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
I agree to review and comment. Note that I am provisionally negative to the
idea itself, and my review may reflect that. Vixie
On March 27, 2017 4:56:58 PM CDT, Dave Lawrence wrote:
>One of the two drafts I wanted to talk about at dnsop today for WG
>adoption was "Serving Stale Data to Improve D
15 matches
Mail list logo
