In message <[email protected]>, David Conrad writes: > On Oct 20, 2011, at 6:07 PM, Keith Moore wrote: > > It might that IETF should consider "bare names" out of its scope, except pe > rhaps to say that they're not DNS names, they don't have to necessarily be ma > ppable to DNS names, and that their use and behavior is host and application- > dependent. > > Can we please not redefine what a "DNS name" is to meet a particular agenda? > > Isn't it sufficient to say a 'bare name' does not conform to a hostname as de > fined in RFC 952 and modified by RFCs 1122?
The problem is that they *are* hostnames, just not "domain style" (RFC 952) or "hierarchical" (RFC 921) hostnames. > Regards, > -drc > > _______________________________________________ > dnsext mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: [email protected] _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
