Re: [DNSOP] Comparison of XML/JSON DNS drafts
Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Wed, 31 July 2013 10:17 UTC
Return-Path: <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F013F21F9DBA for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 03:17:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.249
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, 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 CxrHoyDyzWak for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 03:17:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [192.134.4.12]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06C4821F9EA3 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 03:17:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 610382806E8; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 12:16:49 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from relay2.nic.fr (relay2.nic.fr [192.134.4.163]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CA962804E4; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 12:16:49 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (batilda.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:1348:8::7:113]) by relay2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5191EB3806A; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 12:16:19 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 12:16:19 +0200
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: Jay Daley <jay@nzrs.net.nz>
Message-ID: <20130731101619.GC2874@nic.fr>
References: <3AD202E6-14DF-4403-9530-39ACBE8EC697@nzrs.net.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3AD202E6-14DF-4403-9530-39ACBE8EC697@nzrs.net.nz>
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 7.1
X-Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-4-686-pae i686
Organization: NIC France
X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: dnsop WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Comparison of XML/JSON DNS drafts
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsop>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 10:17:26 -0000
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 09:30:02PM +1200, Jay Daley <jay@nzrs.net.nz> wrote a message of 71 lines which said: > draft-bortzmeyer-dns-json Presented in Orlando but unmaintained afterwards (sorry). I plan to resume it at the autumn. > draft-bortzmeyer-dns-json : > > 0. JSON > 1. Covers 16 RR types In Orlando, there was clear consensus that a better way to define the RR (rather than by enumerating all the possible RRs) would be a good thigng. New RR type appear from time to time. How would you handle that? By publishing a new version of the RFC?
- [DNSOP] Comparison of XML/JSON DNS drafts Jay Daley
- Re: [DNSOP] Comparison of XML/JSON DNS drafts Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: [DNSOP] Comparison of XML/JSON DNS drafts Jay Daley