Re: RFC 2119 section 6

["D. J. Bernstein" <[e-mail]>]

Kevin Darcy writes:
> TSIG and EDNS0 are already with us, and as far as I know it is legal
> for either or both to be transmitted in an AXFR response

Only by bilateral agreement.

> are you seriously suggesting that we already need 2 new port
> assignments, with more to be obtained as new extensions are adopted?

Of course not. You could easily squeeze the entire OSI protocol suite
into a protocol running on a single TCP port.

You have to be careful, however, if you want to use port 25, or port 80,
or port 53. You have to maintain compatibility with the installed base.
That's why protocol designers often use new ports.

Terrified of new ports? Fine. Use a new EXFR query type. This is not
rocket science.

> you have IMO fallen far short of demonstrating that
> "section-agnosticism" has any practical value

I have thousands of sites whose adminitsrators don't want to be forced
to upgrade their working DNS software. If you don't think compatibility
has ``practical value,'' you're an idiot.

---Dan


to unsubscribe send a message to [e-mail] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.