Re: common aliases document

Ryan Moats <jayhawk@ds.internic.net> Thu, 02 May 1996 16:09 UTC

Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa04956; 2 May 96 12:09 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa04950; 2 May 96 12:09 EDT
Received: from zephyr.isi.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa23537; 2 May 96 12:09 EDT
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23) id <AA09803>; Thu, 2 May 1996 09:01:19 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23) id <AA09797>; Thu, 2 May 1996 09:01:18 -0700
Received: from privateer.windrose.omaha.ne.us by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23) id <AA25366>; Thu, 2 May 1996 09:01:16 -0700
Received: by privateer.windrose.omaha.ne.us; Thu May 2 11:00 CDT 1996
Message-Id: <3188DC36.9BF@ds.internic.net>
Date: Thu, 02 May 1996 11:00:54 -0500
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Ryan Moats <jayhawk@ds.internic.net>
Organization: InterNIC Database and Directory Services
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4c)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: Russ Wright <Wright@lbl.gov>
Cc: ietf-ids@umich.edu, uswg@isi.edu
Subject: Re: common aliases document
References: <199605011929.UAA22692@gizmo.lut.ac.uk> <v0300690eadae89c2193c@[131.243.254.16]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig-Sender: owner-uswg@isi.edu
Precedence: bulk

Russ Wright wrote:
> 
> At 08:22 AM  -0500 5/2/96, Ryan Moats wrote:
> >Martin Hamilton wrote:
> >>
> >> IDS folk - here's a new draft of that DNS aliases document.  The
> >> emphasis has changed to direct people first at the IANA assigned
> >> numbers stuff, and then at special cases.
> >>
> >> USWG and namedroppers folk - here's a little something we've been
> >> cooking up.  Feedback sought!
> >>
> >> Martin
> >>
> >
> >
> >Martin-
> >
> >A thought from reading through:
> >
> >Under the special cases wais != z39.50. Thus, there should be two
> >separate entries, wais AND z39.50.
> 
> Valid point, however please keep in mind that we aren't trying to list all
> the services out there. The idea is that you use the IANA-registered name
> if appropriate or one specified in the protocol's RFC.
> 
> Russ

True.  I found the mention of this fact when re-reading the
draft.  It might allievate confusion if that comment were either
re-stated in the special cases section or some discussion is added for
the situation where things seem to want to share the same port number.

Ryan