At 10:39 AM -0800 11/13/08, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 07:25:32PM +0100, Matthias Leisi wrote:
>> Can you please explain what this "fairly serious damage to the DNS
>> protocol" is?
>
>The message I posted from Olafur and me the other day is supposed to
>explain this already:
>
>http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg53776.html
>
>For the impatient, one fundamental problem is that the current
>behaviour uses A records that do not contain host addresses, which is
>contrary to the definition of an A record.
>
>A
>
Andrew,
Thanks for the pointer. I had missed this technical comment in
the crowd, and I think it is very important indeed. By re-using RRs with
context-specific semantics, the proposal does serious harm to interoperability.
Andrew and Olafur suggest one way around this (give a new RR for this
use);
there are others, but this one is both available and makes sense for this usage.
They note that it would take some time to get this deployed. I believe that
the rate of update among DNS-based reputation services is somewhat higher
than Andrew and Olafur seem to, but the change should go forward *whether
this draft is standardized or not*. It's important for the interoperable
understanding
of the DNS namespace for this to occur (or one of the related methods, like
using
a class other than IN to occur).
regards,
Ted Hardie
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
