Re: [Inip-discuss] Domain Names

[Andrew Sullivan <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 08:40:28PM +0000, Edward Lewis wrote:
> I should add one anecdotal story to this.  One of the "legendary figures
> of DNS" once told me that a major screw up was placing the 16-bit field
> for CLASS after the field for the "owner name".  Had the 16-bit field come
> first, it could have been interesting, a way to distinguish different ways
> to encode the owner name.  Being afterwards, one had to stick to one lone
> means of encoding the owner name in order to discover the CLASS value.
> I'll stress that I got this as part of an oral history, not documented, so
> it's almost worth the paper it's written on.  But it is what makes me call
> CLASS vestigial and a DNS artifact, not a Domain Name core concept.

The unwritten draft in my head, "CLASS Considered Useless", will make
exactly this argument.  BTW, it's not just oral history.  I have found
this argument in the very earliest part of the namedroppers archives.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[e-mail]