On Thu, 30 Mar 2017, Woodworth, John R wrote:
"If" a zone admin is aware of this limitation and "if" that zone admin chooses to move forward with deployment to a set of nameservers with a mix of capabilities despite the "ifs" where is the problem?
That's a lot of "if"s. It is quite common for primary and secondary providers to have only a loose relationship, and they do not know or care about their detailed capabilities. I swap secondary service with a bunch of other people I rarely talk to (no need) and if they started sending me BULK records, the results would not be good.
It seems like you are assuming that everyone will eventually support BULK. I see no reason to assume that -- for those of us with small systems, and who do not want to do generic 6 rDNS (see draft-ietf-dnsop-isp-ip6rdns) it's just bloat. This means it'll always be optional, and optional DNS features present new operational issues that we haven't begun to address.
Regards, John Levine, jo...@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
