Apols for top posting am on rim.
I beleive that wildcards are necessary, but that it is acceptable for a
wildcard response to result in return of irrelevant data.
I do not see introduction of a new record as being relevant here. If we
start fixing the dns server to add new records we can fix wildcards support
in those servers. I regard the core dns spec as broken with respect to
wildcards since SRV is a significant capability.
1) only txt records have relevance, 2) wildcards are required, but
*.example.com provides an acceptable solution
3) not applicabe
4) I think the side effects are aceptable and manageable.
I am prepared to accept a new rr tied to marid as a means of creating a
forcig function for dnsext. I think this even makes good sense. But I do not
expect to ever use it and I do not see it as a route for addressing core
I think it makes good sense to expect Windows 2007 to support dnsext and a
new rr as a checkbox item. But that will have no relevance in any timescale
that is relevant for this group.
From: Andrew Newton [mailto:andy(_at_)hxr(_dot_)us]
Sent: Wed Jun 09 12:23:32 2004
To: IETF MARID WG
Subject: Towards resolution on Wildcards
In order to reach consensus on the issue of wildcards, we would like
working group participants to answer the following questions. Please
read through them first before responding.
1) During the MARID interim meeting, Ted Hardie suggested a dual record
type approach whereby TXT would be used in servers incapable of
supporting a new record type, but more capable servers would use a new
record type (specifically defined for MARID). Do you feel this is a
workable solution? (Reference Margaret Olson's description here:
2) Do you feel a MARID solution needs the capability of DNS wildcards?
3) If you answered "yes" to both of the above questions, then is it
reasonable to expect DNS wildcard capability only with the new record
type and not the TXT usage (because TXT may be defined to use a
4) If you answered "no" to either (1) or (2), then do you feel it is
acceptable for TXT reuse to specify a prefix and that environments
needing DNS wildcard behavior may do so at the risk of collision or
other side-effects? (Reference
discussion of this).