Hi Gavin, Thanks for explaining the rationale behind the current text. I am happy to defer to the judgement of you and the rest of the working group on this.
Cheers, Charles > On May 20, 2026, at 5:53 AM, Gavin Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Charles, thanks for your review. > > On Tue, 19 May 2026, at 23:42, Charles Eckel via Datatracker wrote: >> >> [snip] >> >> I have one comment I'd like the authors to consider. >> >> Section 3.1 states: >> "The DNS record type mnemonics that appear as the property names in >> values objects MUST be in all capitals and MUST be registered with >> IANA in [IANA-RRTYPES]. TTL values MUST be unsigned integers in the >> range 0-2147483647 as per Section 8 of [RFC2181]." >> >> How should a client deal with an invalid mnemonic or TTL value? >> >> Section 3 states: >> "As per Section 2.1 of [RFC9083], clients which do not implement this >> specification SHOULD ignore the "ttl0_data" member." >> >> Should clients similarly ignore one with ith an invalid mnemonic or TTL >> value? > > I don't think there is a clear behaviour we want to recommend or require for > either scenario. Different clients built for different purposes will behave > in different ways: a machine-to-machine client is going to be stricter than a > client that simply renders the response into a format to be consumed by a > user. This is why the draft is silent on this point. > > G. > _______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
