On Dec 4 2013, Joe Abley wrote: [...snip...]
There was at least one study commissioned by ICANN on the prudence of provisioning DNAME RRs in the root zone that concluded that there was no obvious danger, but remember that any novel RRTypes in the root zone are going to need implementation time in the systems and processes involved in root zone management, and such changes have proven in the past to be neither quick nor easy.
How would such DNAMEs interact with use of BIND's "root-delegation-only" (or equivalents, if any, in other software)? Do we have any idea how widespread use of that option is? When "ipv4only.arpa" appeared as a delegation in October, I did wonder why it wasn't just an A rrset in the "arpa" zone, until I thought of that issue. Although maybe the reasoning was actually different. -- Chris Thompson University of Cambridge Computing Service, Email: c...@ucs.cam.ac.uk Roger Needham Building, 7 JJ Thomson Avenue, Phone: +44 1223 334715 Cambridge CB3 0RB, United Kingdom. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
