IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] we need help to make names the same, was draft-yao-dnsext-identical-resolution-02 comment

Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> Wed, 16 February 2011 05:20 UTC

Return-Path: <dnsext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@lists.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 739303A6CBD; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 21:20:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 753413A6CBD for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 21:20:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.174
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.174 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.084, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ehFq9R7VfJnX for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 21:20:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp [131.112.32.132]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 708353A6B8E for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 21:20:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 31619 invoked from network); 16 Feb 2011 05:30:49 -0000
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (131.112.32.132) by necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp with SMTP; 16 Feb 2011 05:30:49 -0000
Message-ID: <4D5B5E81.1050602@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 14:20:01 +0900
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; ja; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dnsext@ietf.org
References: <20110216032120.43474.qmail@joyce.lan>
In-Reply-To: <20110216032120.43474.qmail@joyce.lan>
Subject: Re: [dnsext] we need help to make names the same, was draft-yao-dnsext-identical-resolution-02 comment
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org

John Levine wrote:

>> * A solution must not (should not?) require client changes to be useful;
> 
> To me this is the key issue.

So true.

Clients should have remained as they were only allowing ASCII
domain names.

> It would not be absurd to argue that the most reasonable way to solve
> the provisioning issues is for the SMTP and HTTP servers to ask the
> DNS what the canonical name for an otherwise unknown name is,

Are you requesting DNS hold huge database on exponentially many
(millions or billions of) variations?

						Masataka Ohta
_______________________________________________
dnsext mailing list
dnsext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email