Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance
Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> Fri, 06 July 2012 19:33 UTC
Return-Path: <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
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 A27B721F855F for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Jul 2012 12:33:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.525
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.525 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.074, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 1nU6NBZ8GSCZ for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Jul 2012 12:33:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gg0-f172.google.com (mail-gg0-f172.google.com [209.85.161.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC22521F854A for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Jul 2012 12:33:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ggnc4 with SMTP id c4so9844855ggn.31 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Fri, 06 Jul 2012 12:33:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=GW/jl0kJUxk9P4Qq7cQlViiMaLi9XrEzA5aW0hax0mo=; b=Yxz2OdsON5lB5ww0GxU1QElIh3rogJ7hpK9stpbUxFMhOatiE3Bj3UONbtssNbek9D q8tvNlPYamCO++MB+doqmhnVl5RcAvCLu34Es3uLQ7RgTqqFcd8fxmNr+U1W1fU3Q6BY rOJUj6MU3VZfVT7GvuOxS6thQuyZxJb6zk+TKDxHzM3eTqp+LlZeZ7ZvsP7yyJifuIzH 4wqONhveREpKMjRHXZ79pXGj4kvtg50ebqXONm+oUzlhoxTwtM28aQUR75x+dESArzap X7g639L8eHryhw9/GBlCpjJumlk/xuvROFNZyo1gzOKugHnPW082Nj2CmobFMIjGSoBd HQ9g==
Received: by 10.50.196.201 with SMTP id io9mr3214276igc.58.1341603211545; Fri, 06 Jul 2012 12:33:31 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.64.16.227 with HTTP; Fri, 6 Jul 2012 12:33:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <Prayer.1.3.5.1207061956160.6326@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk>
References: <4FD62E4E.4020007@ogud.com> <CAKW6Ri5=c9N+wo_EUn7WrvzNZFVJkpfHcv0OKx8OBJ9ZLzJdGw@mail.gmail.com> <CAF4+nEEqn-S6+8oTvmjeF6eKq+hmiov+AG+S3O41Nq12eUxDCw@mail.gmail.com> <CAKW6Ri7mW0nuEudtyxVp=hoDvJNS8+O4G_LtVfU7nFkQKt-Omw@mail.gmail.com> <CAF4+nEGDpdkxvDa-+HJRD4gYZf_k4fqj12dNcdCwY6-Ah3ENDg@mail.gmail.com> <Prayer.1.3.5.1207061956160.6326@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk>
From: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 15:33:11 -0400
Message-ID: <CAF4+nEHqSQY5ZjPVQFR=XtQy9Gt5iX5iwLucBE9SAALCd1MA7A@mail.gmail.com>
To: cet1@cam.ac.uk
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: dnsext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance
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: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 19:33:15 -0000
Hi Chris, On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Chris Thompson <cet1@cam.ac.uk> wrote: > On Jul 5 2012, Donald Eastlake wrote: > >> Hi Dick, >> >> On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Dick Franks <rwfranks@acm.org> wrote: >>> >>> Donald, >>> >>> My apologies for late response. >>> >>> >>> On 22 June 2012 19:10, Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> wrote: >>> ... >>>>> >>>>> [3.1 paragraph 4] >>>>> and [3.2 paragraph 4] >>>>> >>>>> Regexes: >>>>> >>>>> [A-Z][A-Z0-9\-]*[A-Z0-9] >>>>> >>>>> (TYPE|CLASS)(0|[1-9][0-9]*) >>>>> >>>>> could be simplified to: >>>>> >>>>> [A-Z][A-Z0-9]* >>>>> >>>>> (TYPE|CLASS)[0-9]* >>>> >>>> >>>> That's not simplification, that's change. >>> >>> A simplification of the underlying production rule for RRTYPE mnemonics, >>> which inevitably flows through to the regex. >> >> >> OK, it is a simplification of the RegEx, but one I don't agree with. > > > Regardless of the hyphen question in the first regexp, I think the > change to the second is probably desirable. I don't think RFC 3597 > makes it totally unambiguous that unnecessary leading zeros are not > allowed after TYPE or CLASS, and it is sensible to protect parsers > that are sloppy in this respect. > > Otherwise, one could argue that TYPE65536 ought to be allowed for > a new RR type mnemonic, because it clearly isn't meaningful as a > generic one. I agree and that change is actually already in the -03 version of the draft. > This is all a bit reminiscent of the deprecation of all-digit TLDs. > Ought ".000" or ".256" to be allowed because they are would not > be part of the natural representation of IPv4 addresses? Not that relevant to our current discussion but it is my personal opinion that all-numeric TLDs should be prohibited regardless of length. Thanks, Donald ============================= Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com > -- > Chris Thompson University of Cambridge Computing Service, > Email: cet1@ucs.cam.ac.uk New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QH, > Phone: +44 1223 334715 United Kingdom.
- [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Olafur Gudmundsson
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Michael Sheldon
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Alfred Hönes
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Dick Franks
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Donald Eastlake
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Donald Eastlake
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Olafur Gudmundsson
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Alfred Hönes
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Donald Eastlake
- [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Donald Eastlake
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Ray Bellis
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Donald Eastlake
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Mark Andrews
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Paul Hoffman
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Nicholas Weaver
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Donald Eastlake
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Paul Hoffman
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Dick Franks
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Donald Eastlake
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Donald Eastlake
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Michael Sheldon
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Mark Andrews
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Paul Hoffman
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Chris Thompson
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Donald Eastlake