Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance
Chris Thompson <cet1@cam.ac.uk> Fri, 06 July 2012 18:56 UTC
Return-Path: <dnsext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@lists.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0357111E809F; Fri, 6 Jul 2012 11:56:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1341600972; bh=hxFSLETjSdgipDGtGAlLamQAR/jmuPfwPX9Dwekd9tE=; h=Date:From:To:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Mime-Version: Subject:Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Help:List-Subscribe:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: Sender; b=x1iqq7o7aUUDbxsbOLx/Tf9sGXGVc4Hkhh2fSDFS1ppihfrLEVeI1KhXWlF1r94hx 7/UEZe72elno/F/+wQ2fxfERITtzrexIkq/X7vAEGcUOf/rgIadNuUhwrLFfJ6VeCl bZoKHftp0P9MQvNMREUuNzKkpdd6vPdkjDt4uoqU=
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90DDF11E809F for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Jul 2012 11:56:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 shbl--x1wCUX for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Jul 2012 11:56:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ppsw-43.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-43.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.143]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06FA611E8079 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Jul 2012 11:56:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found
X-Cam-SpamDetails: not scanned
X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/
Received: from hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.54]:44788) by ppsw-43.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.159]:25) with esmtpa (EXTERNAL:cet1) id 1SnDhR-0004su-md (Exim 4.72) for dnsext@ietf.org (return-path <cet1@hermes.cam.ac.uk>); Fri, 06 Jul 2012 19:56:17 +0100
Received: from prayer by hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk (hermes.cam.ac.uk) with local (PRAYER:cet1) id 1SnDhR-0004wJ-1c (Exim 4.67) for dnsext@ietf.org (return-path <cet1@hermes.cam.ac.uk>); Fri, 06 Jul 2012 19:56:17 +0100
Received: from [131.111.11.47] by webmail.hermes.cam.ac.uk with HTTP (Prayer-1.3.5); 06 Jul 2012 19:56:16 +0100
Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 19:56:16 +0100
From: Chris Thompson <cet1@cam.ac.uk>
To: dnsext@ietf.org
Message-ID: <Prayer.1.3.5.1207061956160.6326@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <CAF4+nEGDpdkxvDa-+HJRD4gYZf_k4fqj12dNcdCwY6-Ah3ENDg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4FD62E4E.4020007@ogud.com> <CAKW6Ri5=c9N+wo_EUn7WrvzNZFVJkpfHcv0OKx8OBJ9ZLzJdGw@mail.gmail.com> <CAF4+nEEqn-S6+8oTvmjeF6eKq+hmiov+AG+S3O41Nq12eUxDCw@mail.gmail.com> <CAKW6Ri7mW0nuEudtyxVp=hoDvJNS8+O4G_LtVfU7nFkQKt-Omw@mail.gmail.com> <CAF4+nEGDpdkxvDa-+HJRD4gYZf_k4fqj12dNcdCwY6-Ah3ENDg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Prayer v1.3.5
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: cet1@cam.ac.uk
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Sender: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org
On Jul 5 2012, Donald Eastlake wrote: >Hi Dick, > >On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Dick Franks <rwfranks@acm.org> wrote: >> Donald, >> >> My apologies for late response. >> >> >> On 22 June 2012 19:10, Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> wrote: >> ... >>>> [3.1 paragraph 4] >>>> and [3.2 paragraph 4] >>>> >>>> Regexes: >>>> >>>> [A-Z][A-Z0-9\-]*[A-Z0-9] >>>> >>>> (TYPE|CLASS)(0|[1-9][0-9]*) >>>> >>>> could be simplified to: >>>> >>>> [A-Z][A-Z0-9]* >>>> >>>> (TYPE|CLASS)[0-9]* >>> >>> That's not simplification, that's change. >> A simplification of the underlying production rule for RRTYPE mnemonics, >> which inevitably flows through to the regex. > >OK, it is a simplification of the RegEx, but one I don't agree with. Regardless of the hyphen question in the first regexp, I think the change to the second is probably desirable. I don't think RFC 3597 makes it totally unambiguous that unnecessary leading zeros are not allowed after TYPE or CLASS, and it is sensible to protect parsers that are sloppy in this respect. Otherwise, one could argue that TYPE65536 ought to be allowed for a new RR type mnemonic, because it clearly isn't meaningful as a generic one. This is all a bit reminiscent of the deprecation of all-digit TLDs. Ought ".000" or ".256" to be allowed because they are would not be part of the natural representation of IPv4 addresses? -- Chris Thompson University of Cambridge Computing Service, Email: cet1@ucs.cam.ac.uk New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QH, Phone: +44 1223 334715 United Kingdom. _______________________________________________ dnsext mailing list dnsext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext
- [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Olafur Gudmundsson
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Michael Sheldon
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Alfred Hönes
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Dick Franks
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Donald Eastlake
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Donald Eastlake
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Olafur Gudmundsson
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Alfred Hönes
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Donald Eastlake
- [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Donald Eastlake
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Ray Bellis
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Donald Eastlake
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Mark Andrews
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Paul Hoffman
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Nicholas Weaver
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Donald Eastlake
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Paul Hoffman
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Dick Franks
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Donald Eastlake
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Donald Eastlake
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Michael Sheldon
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Mark Andrews
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Paul Hoffman
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Chris Thompson
- Re: [dnsext] WGLC: RFC6195bis IANA guidance Donald Eastlake