In message <cbe0fbce-b314-4c55-a889-d1d3056fb...@neustar.biz>, Edward Lewis 
writes:
> I have no problem with this in spirit.  But I always wonder why the 
> presentation formats, as in section 3.2 and 4.2, have MUST concerning how 
> the record is "written."  I've never considered the presentation format 
> to be subject to a standard...I realize that's just my opinion, but the 
> on-the-wire format is what is subject to interoperability concerns.

It's a MUST because master file format is a interchange standard.

RFC 1034

The standard format of master files allows them to be exchanged between
hosts (via FTP, mail, or some other mechanism); this facility is useful
when an organization wants a domain, but doesn't want to support a name
server.  The organization can maintain the master files locally using a
text editor, transfer them to a foreign host which runs a name server,
and then arrange with the system administrator of the name server to get
the files loaded.

Mark
 
> The document can have the MUSTs but I'd prefer SHOULDs.  It's right that 
> there's only one way these addresses ever get written, so the MUST seems 
> logical, OTOH, it just seems over the top to demand it be written one way 
> or another.  I certainly understand it is INTENDED to be written as 
> documented, but is it a sin if I implement something else?  (How would an 
> alternate form hinder interoperability.)
> 
> Apparently I am a little cranky today.
> 
> On Apr 14, 2013, at 12:08, joel jaeggli wrote:
> 
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject:    draft-jabley-dnsext-eui48-eui64-rrtypes as AD sponsored 
> individual sumission...
> > Date:       Sun, 14 Apr 2013 08:55:52 -0700
> > From:       joel jaeggli <joe...@bogus.com>
> > To:         dns...@ietf.org, dns...@ietf.org
> > CC:         draft-jabley-dnsext-eui48-eui64-rrty...@tools.ietf.org
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I've been asked to take this document on as AD sponsored individual
> > submission.
> > 
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jabley-dnsext-eui48-eui64-rrtypes-02
> > 
> > If there's anyone who has strenuous objections to that, please let me 
> know.
> > 
> > joel
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > DNSOP mailing list
> > DNSOP@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
> 
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> -
> Edward Lewis             
> NeuStar                    You can leave a voice message at 
> +1-571-434-5468
> 
> There are no answers - just tradeoffs, decisions, and responses.
> 
> 

-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Reply via email to