Mike Blanche wrote: > I would not underestimate the ability for data to be munged between > copying and pasting. The JSON could be pasted into an email, chat > message, or Word doc (!) and sent to someone else to perform the > update... I'm not sure if the above is the best approach but anything > to maintain the integrity of what is produced by the DUJ generator > through to the DUJ recipient would be useful, to reduce instances of > the pasted DUJ being rejected as invalid, or not resulting in the > change that was intended by the generator. > > I agree that the DNS operator should present UI to the user to confirm > "valid DUJ received, this is the change I'm proposing to make...".
If resilience to extreme munging is a concern (and it sounds like it might actually be more important than being able to visually distinguish the data) then I suspect you'd want to do something like append a checksum to the JSON payload and Base64 encode the whole thing. -- Robert Edmonds _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- dnsop@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to dnsop-le...@ietf.org
