The document I mentioned updates RFC 1034. That's how we do things in the IETF!
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:29 PM, Adrien de Croy <adr...@qbik.com> wrote: > yeah, paragraph 2 of that section is what I quoted as at odds with > 1034/1035. > > I've been reading this stuff all day.... > > Looks like 1034/1035 should be obsoleted. > > Thankfully not many people nowadays need to write DNS resolvers. > > Adrien > > ------ Original Message ------ > From: "Ted Lemon" <mel...@fugue.com> > To: "Adrien de Croy" <adr...@qbik.com> > Cc: "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org> > Sent: 8/04/2016 2:24:33 p.m. > Subject: Re: [DNSOP] hostnames vs domain names vs RFC1034/1035 vs RFC2818 > vs Wikipedia etc > > > Have you read the rest of the documents? E.g.,: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2181#section-11 > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:21 PM, Adrien de Croy <adr...@qbik.com> wrote: > >> >> >> ------ Original Message ------ >> From: "Ted Lemon" <mel...@fugue.com> >> >> >> <domain> ::= <subdomain> | " " >>> >>> <subdomain> ::= <label> | <subdomain> "." <label> >>> >>> <label> ::= <letter> [ [ <ldh-str> ] <let-dig> ] >>> >>> <ldh-str> ::= <let-dig-hyp> | <let-dig-hyp> <ldh-str> >>> >>> <let-dig-hyp> ::= <let-dig> | "-" >>> >>> <let-dig> ::= <letter> | <digit> >>> >>> <letter> ::= any one of the 52 alphabetic characters A through Z in >>> upper case and a through z in lower case >>> >>> <digit> ::= any one of the ten digits 0 through 9 >>> >>> >>> if this was a BNF production only for hostnames, why call it <domain>, >> <label> etc. >> >> There's no other BNF for domain name in the spec. >> >> Adrien >> >> >> >>> >>> >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
