IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-05.txt

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Tue, 28 March 2017 14:37 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 1F74A1299E8 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:37:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u2RgvkNl8Uff for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:37:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.bortzmeyer.org (aetius.bortzmeyer.org [217.70.190.232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4A641294CD for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:37:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id C200331C7D; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:37:41 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by godin (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 73366EC0AFC; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:33:52 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:33:52 -0500
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20170328143352.GA12923@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
References: <148942077219.17007.342057944218385620@ietfa.amsl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <148942077219.17007.342057944218385620@ietfa.amsl.com>
X-Transport: UUCP rules
X-Operating-System: Ubuntu 16.04 (xenial)
X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/GhpTDLoGAPzn-8_vHXiisLul4Uk>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-05.txt
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 14:37:46 -0000

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 08:59:32AM -0700,
 internet-drafts@ietf.org <internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote 
 a message of 45 lines which said:

>         Title           : DNS Terminology
>         Authors         : Paul Hoffman
>                           Andrew Sullivan
>                           Kazunori Fujiwara
> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-05.txt

The new definition of QNAME describes as equivalent two conflicting
definitions, the original one, in RFC 1034, and the one of RFC 2308,
which seems used only by this RFC. IMHO, we should keep only the RFC
1034 definition.

I filed an errata against RFC 2308
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=4983>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email