IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: WG Action: RECHARTER: DNS Extensions (dnsext)

Dean Anderson <dean@av8.com> Fri, 11 February 2005 09:59 UTC

From: Dean Anderson <dean@av8.com>
Subject: Re: WG Action: RECHARTER: DNS Extensions (dnsext)
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 04:59:44 -0500
Lines: 31
References: <200502092039.PAA11790@ietf.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
Cc: Olafur Gudmundsson <ogud@ogud.com>, Olaf Kolkman <olaf@ripe.net>
X-From: owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org Fri Feb 11 11:12:18 2005
Return-path: <owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>
X-X-Sender: dean@localhost.localdomain
To: namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <200502092039.PAA11790@ietf.org>
Sender: owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
X-Message-ID:
Message-ID: <20140418072006.2560.65378.ARCHIVE@ietfa.amsl.com>

>          + RFC3??? AXFR clarify to Draft Standard.

I thought AXFR clarify died a horrible and tragic death after a short and
ill-fated attempt to impose unnecessary changes made by Bind on the rest
of the DNS implmentations.

Why is this still on the list?

Possibly AXFR does need to be clarified. I think it was agreed that the
current spec was vague, but Bind groups' proposed solution was universally
rejected (by everyone except those associated with Bind, of course)

I may be willing to write a clarification for AXFR that corrects the
ambiguity in the fashion accepted by all of the non-Bind server
implementations.

		--Dean

-- 
Av8 Internet   Prepared to pay a premium for better service?
www.av8.net         faster, more reliable, better service
617 344 9000   



--
to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email