Hello Andreas,
I agree with you, I'm addressing a similar topic than the good old SPF
does. However, one point is that the email carries intrinsic data in
the envelope that is not obvious to replace, another is the necessity
(for me at least) to publish what level of authorization control is
perfo
Hello,
I'm back with a proper datatracker :
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-adell-client-roaming/
best regards
E.A.
Le mer. 15 juin 2022 à 12:54, Eugène Adell a écrit :
>
> Hi Paul,
>
> I don't have any tracker for now, any clue to get one is wellcome.
>
>
Hi Paul,
I don't have any tracker for now, any clue to get one is wellcome.
regards
Eugène
Le mer. 15 juin 2022 à 12:01, Paul Wouters a écrit :
> On Jun 15, 2022, at 08:56, Eugène Adell wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > It looks like the attached file was removed b
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7239>.
Adell Expires 14 December 2022 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Client Roaming ControlJune 2022
[RFC8499] Hoffman, P., Sullivan, A., and K. Fujiwara, "DNS
Ter
text for an IPv4/24 vs 7 octets
> for APL.
> An IPv4/8 is 9-11 vs 5 octets. The :: improves this a little bit for IPv6
> but in
> general you will be dealing with /48’s or longer ::::/48 (19
> octets)
> vs 10 for APL.
>
> >> On 5 Apr 2022, at 20:52, Eugène Ad
a écrit :
>
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022, Eugène Adell wrote:
>
> > Beyond the technical aspects, there are several different persons to
> > think about in our case : the DNS administrator obviously, the
> > decision maker buying (or not) a secured online service, and the CISO.
>
t; > I see no reason to re-invent the wheel here.
> >
> > ftp.foo.com_21_bar.com,195.13.35.0/24,91.220.43.0/24
> >
> > would be
> >
> > ftp.foo.com._21._crc.bar.com APL 1:195.13.35.0/24 1:91.220.43.0/24
>
>
> Additionally text is a really bad way to tran
Hello,
I've been working on two new RRTypes described by a Draft, and as
suggested by our magnificent, incredibly brilliant and handsome AD
Warren "ACE" Kumari, I am posting here this idea and the material I
have written so far (the draft itself, and RFC 6895 components).
Briefly, one RRType (CRC
