On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 03:58, Paul Wouters <[email protected]> wrote: 8<
You are suggesting to introduce an option code point to convey blobs in > DNS. So different parties can send and receive blobs. You think or hope > that these parties will interpret this blob the same. But you have no > guarantee this is true. > groundhog day > If you have a specific use case, get a code point for that specific use > case. Than you know for sure what the blob means and that it will be > interpreted by all parties in the same standard RFC way. > There are exactly two parties to a bi-lateral agreement. > If your use case is too private/secret or non-standard, then use a > code point from the "Reserved for Local/Experimental Use" range. My inclination too, but the argument cannot be made by ignoring the clearly stated requirement for agreement between participating parties. --Dick
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
