what has been the practice in implementations of the various referenced RFCs? John's interpretation or Robert's?
or has the apparent ambiguity also shown up in working implementations? vint At 06:21 AM 5/30/2002 -0400, John C Klensin wrote: >(i) Whether the correct reading on the DNS specs is that "ASCII" >versus "binary" is a function of RR type, or a function of the >bits in the octets. I take the text to suggest that _only_ >ASCII (note, ASCII, not LDH) is permitted in RR types defined in >or by 1034/1035, but that "future" RR types (and Classes) can be >defined to have binary labels. Robert takes it as permitted >characters outside the ASCII range, with case handling undefined >for those characters.
