Mark Andrews writes: > > The DNS has more than one opcode. Why don't we just use one of > them to discover the registrar for <qname,qtype,qclass>? If you > get back NOTIMP you fallback to traditional UPDATE to the parent. > The response to the query would be PTR record(s) to the UPDATE > server(s). I would use whois for this discovery but the response is free form text and you have the whole whois server discovery problem to deal with.
Registrars already trust the registry to supply this information over whois. > Mark > > In message <[email protected]>, Paul Hoffman writ > es > : > > On Oct 8, 2013, at 1:10 PM, Doug Barton <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> That is the opposite of the feeling that I got from the DNSOP meeting in > B > > erlin. > > > > > > ... and yet, there is a larger world outside the select few able to atten > d > > the meetings. :) One could even reasonably argue that the opinion of those > w > > ho do attend the meetings is of questionable statistical validity due to vo > lu > > nteer bias. > > > > If your view is that the only way to write a standard is after you have hea > rd > > from a majority of everyone who would be affected by it, that's fine, but > it > > is not the model that is used standards bodies like the IETF. > > > > --Paul Hoffman > > _______________________________________________ > > DNSOP mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > -- > Mark Andrews, ISC > 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia > PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: [email protected] -- 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
