On 05/03/2019 09:11, Shane Kerr wrote:
I don't see much value in this beyond the already-standardized EDNS
range reserved for local/experimental use.
Shane,
The additional value is being able to use the feature in off-the-shelf
DNS software.
Stretching the analogy to BGP communities slightly (the authors had
already discussed this internally when working on the draft, and Wes has
made that comparison too):
Folks *could* have decided to use some unassigned BGP Path attribute
value to carry similar information, but each implementor would have had
their own special version of it. Making it _standardised_ is what
allows support to be ubiquitous (and interoperable).
Ray
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
