On 2012-07-09, at 12:14 PM, Jim Reid wrote: > On 9 Jul 2012, at 16:39, Edward Lewis wrote: > >> Should DiG's output be unchanged or is this "good?" Should the OS vendors >> be asked to stop this? > > IMO, dig should only display what's actually in the DNS packets.
By default, yes. > Some other tool(s) can be used to render IDNs into whatever non-ASCII > scripts/fonts may (or may not) be appropriate. I like that dig can do this itself, so long as it doesn't do it unless I explicitly tell it to. > The *last* thing dig needs are even more command line or environment > variables. I don't see any problem at all with more command line options, I like getting more stuff, and as these are options I don't have to know about them if I don't want to. > The output you showed Ed illustrates the problem when poorly thought-out > "features" are added and then break things when there was no need whatsoever > for that behaviour. Having the option is great, making it the default isn't. I think dig is doing the right thing here, whoever packages dig for whatever distro Ed is using is not. > I doubt the Linux kiddies will care. The message in Rob Pike's "cat -v > harmful" USENIX talk from the late 1990s is just lost on them. dave _______________________________________________ dns-operations mailing list dns-operations@lists.dns-oarc.net https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations dns-jobs mailing list https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-jobs
