> From: Tony Finch <[email protected]>
> I recently noticed that the bailiwick-related definitions are wrong and
> muddled.
>
> I have always understood in-bailiwick to mean that a nameserver name is a
> subdomain of its zone apex. That is, exactly the cases where glue is
> required by the DNS protocol. The term comes from the discussion of
> gluelessness at http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/notes.html - "RFC 1034 specifically
> requires glue for referrals to in-bailiwick DNS servers."
>
> RFC 8499 seems to use "in-domain" for this situation
Yes.
Before RFC 8499, "in-bailiwick" had two meanings.
in-bailiwick to mean that a nameserver name is a subdomain of its zone apex.
and
"in-domain" http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/notes.html
>, which is not a term
> I have seen anywhere else.
Yes.
I borrowed the words "in-domain" and "sibling" from
draft-koch-dns-glue-clarifications.
(submitted in 2010, draft only)
There are no "in-bailiwick" and "out-of-bailiwick" definitions
before RFC 7719.
We need four types of glue names.
In RFC 8499, "out-of-bailiwick", "in-bailiwick", "in-domain", "sibling".
Please propose new names.
# And I missed a term related to domain name: Occluded Name [(RFC6936].
--
Kazunori Fujiwara, JPRS <[email protected]>
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
