IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Enum] Re: NAPTR Record Replacement Field

Patrik Fältström <paf@swip.net> Sat, 10 June 2000 12:43 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA08249 for <enum-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 08:43:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA27656; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 08:41:50 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA27628 for <enum@ns.ietf.org>; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 08:41:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from nix.swip.net (nix.swip.net [192.71.220.2]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA08234 for <enum@ietf.org>; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 08:41:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [192.168.124.95] (workstation1.swip.net [130.244.254.1]) by nix.swip.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA13153; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 14:41:13 +0200 (MET DST)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: paf@nix.swip.net
Message-Id: <p04320468b567e263e717@[192.168.124.95]>
In-Reply-To: <39411759.CB920970@research.telcordia.com>
References: <39411759.CB920970@research.telcordia.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 14:25:47 +0200
To: Hong Liu <lhong@research.telcordia.com>, enum@ietf.org
From: Patrik Fältström <paf@swip.net>
Cc: lhong@research.telcordia.com, Michael Mealling <michael@bailey.dscga.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Subject: [Enum] Re: NAPTR Record Replacement Field
Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: Enum Discussion List <enum.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org

At 12.12 -0400 00-06-09, Hong Liu wrote:
>In "draft-ietf-enum-e164-dns-00.txt", you use the replacement field of
>the NAPTR RR to store the the URLs for the answer of an E.164 query,
>such as a SIP URL "sip:paf@swip.net". When I looked through the NAPTR RR
>documents, both RFC2168 and "draft-ietf-urn-naptr-rr-03.txt" say that
>the replacement field MUST be a fully qualified domain name. Maybe I am
>missing something. Could you explain the difference here?

First, it is a mistake that the flag field is not "U" as it should 
(according to draft-ietf-urn-naptr-rr-03.txt). Secondly, as long as 
the process which uses NAPTR RRs specify what an eventual rewrite 
operate on, that is ok. I think I am clear on what an eventual regexp 
for rewrite operates on in the paper. If not, let me know.

>The second question is regarding the service field "N2R". According to
>RFC2168, "N2R" is a service that maps an URN to an instance of resource.
>Since an ENUM query returns a set of URLs, will that be "N2L" instead?

As far as I think, N2R is the correct thing, but with flag "U" and a 
URL in the regexp field. Michael?

   paf

_______________________________________________
enum mailing list
enum@ietf.org
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email