On Wed, 1 Apr 2015, John R Levine wrote:
So, if hashing anything here, please stick with sha256 and truncate
the output if you need it shorter.
For reasons discussed at great length, I don't think any sort of hash is a
good idea here. Do you see any problems with the base32 encoding?
The current mechanism for lookup can only return exact matches.
The application creating the query already has access to the unhashed
name. So whatever future protocol extension is used, the application
can use the unhashed name with that future extension.
Applications using base32 would still need to have an exact match to
return anything in DNS - so I do not understand the use of base32 and
another confusing empty non-terminal dot in DNS.
I do not understand the advantage of base32 in the QNAME.
Paul
_______________________________________________
dane mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane
