On 23/02/2018 12:56, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 12:31:29PM +0000, > Sara Dickinson <s...@sinodun.com> wrote > a message of 51 lines which said: > >> We have an update to draft which we hope captures all the comments >> to-date. > > I think so, too. At least, it captured mine :-)
Good. And thanks for the feedback. We've noted your answers to our 'QUESTIONS' and other comments. >> QUESTION: No EDNS(0) option currently includes a name, however if one >> were to include a name and permit name compression then both these >> mechanisms would fail. > > Is it even possible? RFC 6891 does not mention it. But it says > "OPTION-DATA. MUST be treated as a bit field." which seems to imply > that storing the entire OPT RR, or the option data, as a blob, is > perfectly OK. I am also unclear as to whether storing a compressed name in an option is permitted. As you say, the language seems to imply treating the data as a blob is the only option, which suggests that it's not permitted. We'd be interested in any contrary opinions. -- Jim Hague - j...@sinodun.com Never trust a computer you can't lift. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
