Re: [dbound] Updated draft-levine-orgboundary-03

["John Levine" <[e-mail]>]

Not to toot my own horn or anything, but I really think this does most
of what people have said they want DBOUND to do, published in the DNS,
with each domain publishing its own info in the tree it controls, no
new TLDs or other administratively painful changes, provision for
different boundaries for different applications, and most checks in
one or two DNS queries regardless of how deep the name tree is.

What's not to like?

R's,
John


>I added a flag so you can say no boundaries below this one, and it has a 
>less kludgy way of allowing different applications to have different 
>boundaries.
>
>A boundary check will generally be one DNS lookup if a boundary does not 
>permit lower level boundaries, or two if it does.  It uses DNS wildcards 
>in a way that is fairly aggressive but as far as I can tell is 100% in 
>compliance with the specs and will work on normal name servers.
>
>https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-levine-orgboundary-03.txt