On 29/03/2017 10:41, Dave Lawrence wrote:
> Well yes, but there's another simple test, the limited Expert Review > guidance against duplicate functionality. Both xpf and clientid > provide the functionality of conveying an IP address in an EDNS0 > option. Whilst you're correct that they both carry information that happens to have the same format, they have different semantic intent, and it would IMHO cause confusion if both were carried in a packet with the same option code. It's effectively the same argument about TXT records - there's plenty of things that use TXT format, but it's preferred that separate RRTYPEs are used to indicate the use case. Ray _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
