Re: [dnsext] Meeting in Beijing

"W.C.A. Wijngaards" <> Thu, 14 October 2010 12:17 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E89C3A6AF4; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 05:17:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.869
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.869 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.365, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_NL=0.55, HOST_EQ_NL=1.545, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SFiL++TSHP13; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 05:16:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:418:1::62]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2ED03A69EB; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 05:16:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from majordom by with local (Exim 4.72 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <>) id 1P6MgG-000BO3-EK for; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 12:13:08 +0000
Received: from ([]) by with esmtp (Exim 4.72 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <>) id 1P6MgD-000BNB-A7 for; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 12:13:05 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 568015816E; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 14:13:03 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [] ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7A924580C4; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 14:12:50 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 14:12:47 +0200
From: "W.C.A. Wijngaards" <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100915 Thunderbird/3.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Rose, Scott W." <>
CC: Namedroppers WG <>
Subject: Re: [dnsext] Meeting in Beijing
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.3 at rotring
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <>
List-Unsubscribe: To unsubscribe send a message to with
List-Unsubscribe: the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
List-Archive: <>

Hash: SHA1


On 10/14/2010 01:35 PM, Rose, Scott W. wrote:
>> draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2672bis-dname-19 
> Wouter and I need to rev this (if only to keep it alive).  I think
> we're still hung up on the whole "What to return when the target name
> of a DNAME doesn't exist" question (the long thread).  From my
> reading (as much as I could follow), that was never resolved but spun
> into larger questions about redirection.

It was resolved to not make changes, so I think it is appropriate to
have no text about this.  (that makes it identical to CNAME, as it is
right now).

Best regards,
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -