On 6 Nov 2018, at 17:51, Joe Abley wrote: >> On Nov 6, 2018, at 20:44, Tony Finch <d...@dotat.at> wrote: >> >> Joe Abley <jab...@hopcount.ca> wrote: >>> >>> Specifically, I s the wildcard owner name a real problem in the grand >>> scheme of things? >> >> My understanding is that wildcards don't work for SRV because the >> _prefixes are used to disambiguate which service you are asking for, >> effectively to extend the RR TYPE number space. So if you wildcard a SRV >> record then the target port has to support every possible protocol :-) > > Right, but my point was that wildcard owner names aren't seen at the apex, so > a solution to the problem of what to do at the apex doesn't need to worry > about them. > > Ray has wider aspirations than just the apex. This may well be sensible, but > I think it's worth calling out the scope creep.
We should also remember that there is a different goal as well, and that is to be able to delegate the zone within which "the records dealing with web" is managed so that the administrative responsibility is separated between the one which run the zone for example.com and the ones that run for _http._tcp.example.com (or _tcp.example.com). Patrik
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
