IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] Want this to be a WG doc?

Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> Thu, 29 March 2012 11:23 UTC

Return-Path: <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD1C021F8913 for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 04:23:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.472
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.472 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.127, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6hYHG5gZXqCO for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 04:23:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ppsw-52.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-52.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.152]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CEB721F880C for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 04:23:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found
X-Cam-SpamDetails: not scanned
X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/
Received: from hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.54]:35299) by ppsw-52.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.159]:25) with esmtpa (EXTERNAL:fanf2) id 1SDDSJ-0003EW-EM (Exim 4.72) (return-path <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>); Thu, 29 Mar 2012 12:23:51 +0100
Received: from fanf2 (helo=localhost) by hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk (hermes.cam.ac.uk) with local-esmtp id 1SDDSJ-0007LY-DD (Exim 4.67) (return-path <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>); Thu, 29 Mar 2012 12:23:51 +0100
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 12:23:51 +0100
From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
X-X-Sender: fanf2@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk
To: Edward Lewis <Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz>
In-Reply-To: <a06240804cb99d889a11a@[192.168.130.74]>
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1203291220380.3931@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk>
References: <a06240804cb99d889a11a@[192.168.130.74]>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LSU 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: Tony Finch <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
Cc: dnsext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dnsext] Want this to be a WG doc?
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 11:23:55 -0000

Edward Lewis <Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz> wrote:

> Any thoughts on whether the following would be a DNSEXT document? I'm asking
> DNSOP too.
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lewis-dns-undocumented-types-01

Having gone through the IANA RR type registry recently, this is quite a
useful document :-)

There's a nit in section 2.0: there is no need to consider downcasing or
compression, since RFCs 3597 and 4034 completely specify which RRs are
subject to these modifications.

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  <dot@dotat.at>  http://dotat.at/
Plymouth, Biscay: Northeast 3 or 4, occasionally 5 in Biscay. Slight or
moderate. Mainly fair. Moderate, occasionally poor.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email