IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] SRV and wildcard CNAME

Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> Mon, 21 February 2011 04:51 UTC

Return-Path: <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
X-Original-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB4CE3A6F05 for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 20 Feb 2011 20:51:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.008, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id j5sTVfV5rGRD for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 20 Feb 2011 20:51:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp [131.112.32.132]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id C40DD3A6EC0 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Sun, 20 Feb 2011 20:51:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 20763 invoked from network); 21 Feb 2011 05:04:04 -0000
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (131.112.32.132) by necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp with SMTP; 21 Feb 2011 05:04:04 -0000
Message-ID: <4D61EF65.1000602@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 13:51:49 +0900
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; ja; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
References: <20110216032120.43474.qmail@joyce.lan> <alpine.LSU.2.00.1102161143180.5244@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk> <20110216212930.57D64A3F344@drugs.dv.isc.org> <4D5D24F3.70206@gis.net> <20110217231720.1FCF3A49096@drugs.dv.isc.org> <4D5E08E4.8060106@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <AANLkTikjBvndD91q1jQeU9Q45qZyJbBs8t_wZkFezSfa@mail.gmail.com> <4D61B702.7060902@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <20110221011731.F0FE0A6B00F@drugs.dv.isc.org> <4D61C45E.7000506@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <20110221022950.BE88CA6B2DD@drugs.dv.isc.org> <4D61D194.9040804@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <4D61D350.9040401@maxqe.com> <4D61E272.1050600@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <20110221042537.0AE4EA6CFFF@drugs.dv.isc.org>
In-Reply-To: <20110221042537.0AE4EA6CFFF@drugs.dv.isc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-2022-JP"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: dnsext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dnsext] SRV and wildcard CNAME
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 04:51:51 -0000

Mark Andrews wrote:

> When the discovery phase of the protocol returns a answer when it
> shouldn't have you have broken the protocol regardless of whether
> it would ultimately succeed or not.

You can't force lazy users strictly follow your idea on how
protocols should not break.

They are fine if their http domains work.

> Additionally no one has the ability to foresee future needs.

Just say, TTL.

						Masataka Ohta

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email