There are 0 or more sub TLV fields. -- Mark Andrews
> On 3 Jan 2020, at 18:47, Miek Gieben <[email protected]> wrote: > > [ Quoting <bemasc=40google.com@dmarc> in "Re: [DNSOP] SVCB wire format > (draft..." ] >> Hi Miek, >> >> The wire format is the same for AliasForm and ServiceForm, exactly as you >> describe. What do you think is different? > > Because of this text: > > o the SvcFieldValue byte string, consuming the remainder of the > record (so smaller than 65535 octets and constrained by the RDATA > and DNS message sizes). > > vs: > > o a 2 octet field containing the SvcParamKey as an integer in > network byte order. > > o a 2 octet field containing the length of the SvcParamValue as an > integer between 0 and 65535 in network byte order (but constrained > by the RDATA and DNS message sizes). > > o an octet string of the length defined by the previous field. > > > My reading of this is that for ServiceForm there will always be 4 octets and > for AliasForm > it may just be empty. > >> Note that the wire format is definitely not yet final. For example, >> there's still some active discussion about precisely how to represent the >> contents of the SvcFieldValue (in ServiceForm). > > What's the reason behind not reusing the TXT record? To free-form? Other > issues? > > > /Miek > > -- > Miek Gieben > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
