On 15 Nov 2025, at 4:38, Dave Lawrence wrote: > Marco Davids \(IETF IMAP\) writes: >> I'm working on a draft (draft-davids-forsalereg) in which TXT >> records play an essential role. To avoid ambiguity I ended up >> dedicating an entire section (5.2) to character encoding. > > Okay, cool. I think for a new definition like this you can just declare that > the TXT RDATA should be interpreted as a continuous UTF-8 string without > regard to the 255 octet segment boundaries. It feels like maybe 5.2 has > slightly too many words for accomplishing this, but seems okay enough.
No, you should not redefine an existing RRType. Create a new one if you feel that is required. You can specifically "just compare" two series of Unicode strings by looking at the bits, as equivalent of Unicode strings is something completely different. So, just "no". Do not go there. Patrik
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
