In message , Pete
Resnick writes:
> [Apologies for the re-send. Using the correct address.]
>
> On 6 Jul 2017, at 16:52, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> > Or you could stop trying to reinforce the myth that new RR types
> > are hard to deploy. They really aren't. They actually get used
> > all the ti
On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 11:27:45AM -0700, william manning wrote:
> You need a better imagination then. mDNS is a crippled DNS implementation
> that was hobbled on purpose. HS was/is an entirely different addressing
> scheme that emerged from project Athena @ MIT. To the extent that when all
>
[Apologies for the re-send. Using the correct address.]
On 6 Jul 2017, at 16:52, Mark Andrews wrote:
Or you could stop trying to reinforce the myth that new RR types
are hard to deploy. They really aren't. They actually get used
all the time.
I'm running the latest version of MacOS Server.
You need a better imagination then. mDNS is a crippled DNS implementation
that was hobbled on purpose. HS was/is an entirely different addressing
scheme that emerged from project Athena @ MIT. To the extent that when all
you have been given is the IN class and it's associated rooted hierarchy,
Mark,
On Jul 6, 2017, 11:56 PM -0700, Mark Andrews , wrote:
> > > Or you could stop trying to reinforce the myth that new RR types
> > > are hard to deploy. They really aren't.
Please stop trying to minimize the amount of work here. They really are. Not
for you, but for the folks who make domain
On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 03:32:21PM +0200, David Cake wrote:
> > On 5 Jul 2017, at 10:47 am, Randy Bush wrote:
> >
> > i think avoiding icann is a red herring. if the draft in question had
> > done a decent job of exploring the taxa of needs for name resolution
> > outside of the 'normal' topolog
On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 11:37:39AM -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 08:09:30AM -0700, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > Nico Williams wrote:
> > >...
> >
> > ...
> >
> > i know which future i'd rather live in. i also feel in-year pressure to get
> > my work done. i vacillate as to who ge
On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 08:09:30AM -0700, Paul Vixie wrote:
> Nico Williams wrote:
> >...
> >
> >I'm well aware that as to clients and servers, deploying new RR types is
> >easy. The hard part is the management backend and UIs. Not all of them
> >allow you to enter raw RDATA (hex-encoded or whate
On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 04:56:37PM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
> In message <20170707055315.GC3393@localhost>, Nico Williams writes:
> > We've struggled with this in KITTEN WG. Deploying the URI RR type when
> > you're using a hosting service can be anywhere from annoying (must enter
> > raw RDATA)
Nico Williams wrote:
...
I'm well aware that as to clients and servers, deploying new RR types is
easy. The hard part is the management backend and UIs. Not all of them
allow you to enter raw RDATA (hex-encoded or whatever).
We've struggled with this in KITTEN WG. Deploying the URI RR type
If you have a single centralised root for your new class, you will probably
either recreate the problems of ICANN, or create one or more of the problems
that ICANN has very consciously tried to avoid.
If you have a system of name resolution that avoids the need for a centralised
root, you probab
11 matches
Mail list logo
