ietf-asrg
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Asrg] Update on Querying IADB

2004-03-30 15:55:39
Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
I agree with Yakov here, the A record convention is widely used it has
become a defacto extension to the specs. But the data being exchanged is
essentially binary in nature.

Anne's proposal strikes me as trying to use the A record to do far too much.
Once you start to try to move that amount of data it would be better to move
to using the TXT record or get a whole new RR defined. As long as the
overall record is shorter than 512 bytes there is no impact on performance.


This issue is not limited to IADB, rather there are existing blacklists as well such as SORBS that are extending the original DNSBL protocol to do extra stuff. All of this can benefit from standards.

This has another concrete benefit, the need for ad-hoc extensions of the
code set as new accrediting agencies appear goes away.
The big difference between Anne's approach and mine is that I am proposing
that the accreditation data be separated into two parts, the accreditations
themselves and a single master record that describes the accreditation
service.

This ties in with what I think would be the data structures that filters
would build up. Each accreditation service being tracked would be
represented by some sort of master record that described the current
evaluation of the service. The description provided by the service would
provide part of that record, measurements of the performance of the service
would then be added in.

Do you think that both parts need to be standardized?

Yakov

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>