Eliot Lear wrote:
Greetings Arvel,
(2) SSP record type (TXT vs. something new). Only 4 messages in
discussion, mostly saying "if you support TXT, don't bother with
anything else." Again, no clear consensus.
If a new RR can solve the wildcard issue and we feel that this is a
significant issue worth solving (or at least addressing) then perhaps
we should create a system that looks for a new RR first and failing
that, falls back to TXT.
As a guy who recommended TXT records earlier I could just as easily live
with a new record. What I am more concerned about is the amount of
complexity in the system. Going through both TXT *and* SSP records
seems like a recipe for synchronization problems and other nasties that
we could best do without. And I could easily be convinced by Peter Koch
that a new record just isn't that hard to get out there.
How will my Mr. Koch assure the world that new RR record queries will be
reliable? that all new RR queries will be expected to be passed thru
recursive queries by heterogeneous DNS servers?
I don't think so Eliot.
--
Sincerely
Hector Santos, CTO
http://www.santronics.com
http://santronics.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html