Re: [dnsext] we need help to make names the same, was draft-yao-dnsext-identical-resolution-02 comment

[Phillip Hallam-Baker <[e-mail]>]

I think the big problem here is the failure to accept the fact that the
problem as stated is ambiguous and interpreted literally is nonsense.


If we have two trees, x.y.z.a, x.y.z.b what does it mean for them both to be
'the same'?

Do we mean the same from an application point of view or from a DNS layer
point of view?


Solving the problem from the application point of view is easy. We just
invent a new pointer that aware applications can interpret. Non-aware
applications will not.

Making the two trees 'the same' at a DNS level appears to me to be nonsense.
It is only possible for the DNSSEC signature to be for one of them. So they
are not going to be exactly the same, one must inevitably be the canonical
form.


This particular issue seems to arise from certain political objectives, the
futility of which has been amply demonstrated in the past few weeks.