On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 09:35:40PM -0300, Rubens Kuhl wrote: > > It was curious to see that a to-be-unnamed TLD registry, a newcomer > to the scene many years after the holy wars that ended up defining > the current RFCs, writing completely new code, mentioned that they > found attributes to be a better option
Well, note, the RFCs actually allow you to do one or the other, so there was no "victor" in the war. Many people when designing a new registry think attributes are better because they don't create cross-object links. If you come from the database side of the house (which I do), you are given shudders because of the potential for data inconsistency in glue. Lots of new registries don't have a glue problem early on, and so this never seems like it's worth worrying about. That's the real reason I prefer the host-object approach. But like Frederico, I don't want to reignite a controversy. > better, but for me it indicates that the role in the value chain can > play a part in which option is preferred. Yes. Interoperability is way more important that just about anything else on the Internet. A -- Andrew Sullivan a...@anvilwalrusden.com _______________________________________________ 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
