Resent
Shown a red card by DKIM

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Dick Franks <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 15:04
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Re: [Ext] Revised the application for the WALLET RRTYPE
To: Shumon Huque <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Cc: Petr Špaček <[email protected]>



On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 at 14:03, Shumon Huque <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 5, 2024 at 8:19 AM Petr Špaček <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> >8
>>
>> I wonder if it needs some words how to handle wallet addresses longer
>> than 255 characters?
>>
>>
> I was wondering the same thing earlier, but forgot to chime in about it.
>
> Why should a new RR-type be constrained in this way? It should define its
> RDATA components to be as large as they need to be.
>
>
The length of the currency field is known, as is the RDATA length, so there
is no need for any length constraint on the wallet address.

The URI record (RFC7553) uses an unconstrained string, so this is nothing
new.


--rwf





> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to