At 10:31 -0800 1/28/12, todd glassey wrote:
In the interim we think a COPYRIGHT USE STATEMENT published as a TEXT type record may work for systems which use legacy packages to operate.
Do you mean like the response to these queries? $ dig ac. txt +short or $ dig at. txt +short and a handful of others? Beyond that, there is a process defined to add a new DNS RR type defined in BCP 42.
What we came to is that the lookup process may need to be amended to support copyright disclosure for the records responded and that this is key to global copyright protection.
As far as altering the query-response mechanism to always include a copyright, the workload amounts to doing DNSSEC all over again. Adding a copyright to every response is akin to adding an digital signature to every response (set). Even though adding the text would be less of a strain than computing the signatures, alterations are needed to the basic algorithms (like my fav "RFC 1034/sec 4.3.2" + updates) which in turn means new code all around.
(Starting with the 2004 release of the DNSSEC specs, it took about 6 years to get the root zone signed. Imagine trying to decide who the copyright holder is for the root zone!)
This wouldn't be easy because the DNS just wasn't designed with legal restrictions in mind. Adding a set of requirements means some amount of re-engineering. And I'd add that this set of requirements might not be seen as universal.
What I'm suggesting is that beyond adding TXT records in the apex of the zone defining anything is going to be a long hard road.
-- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Edward Lewis NeuStar You can leave a voice message at +1-571-434-5468 2012...time to reuse those 1984 calendars! _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
