see inline.
Brian Dickson wrote on 2022-10-21 14:17:
On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 1:36 PM Paul Vixie <p...@redbarn.org
<mailto:p...@redbarn.org>> wrote:
...
can you say more about why you think this? (what incompatibilities
lurk?)
The different anchor points are (would be?) tied to different purposes,
intended behavior for namespaces and resolvers (including leaked
queries), and relatively low level-of-effort for DNS-friendly
experimentation.
ah.
So, my read on the general sentiment is:
* "alt" => not DNS, or at least not DNS-friendly, including has DNSSEC
preventing resolution via validating resolvers.
* "alt.arpa" => extending DNS without conflicting with existing
ICANN-regulated namespaces, is DNS-friendly, has DNSSEC unsigned
delegation point included (so won't be made unuseable when slightly
modified validating caching resolvers are involved)
i only care about the first bullet-point above. extending DNS may be
important but it's not the same as the carve-out i am looking for.
--
P Vixie
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
