On Sat, 2 Jun 2007, Steve Atkins wrote:
The problem is that you've just spec'ed SSP to use a protocol that
is not DNS. It's fairly similar to DNS, but it's not DNS. I can't
imagine the IESG accepting that in a standards track document.
No, it's perfectly compliant DNS. Really, it is.
It's not bind, though, and there's a fairly common fallacy at IESG,
amongst other places, that DNS is "what bind does" rather than
vice-versa. So, yeah, you're right about the standards document
issue (were it me, I'd just spec TXT records and not mention
wildcards at all).
I have a dns server that'll do internal wildcard records today (as
do you, IIRC). The information it uses to do that will not transfer
correctly over AXFR - but who, other than some subset of bind
users, uses AXFR to maintain their secondaries, anyway? :)
If it was just AXFR all would be great. But in order to do DNSSEC it is
in fact necessary for servers to know how to process wildcards and that
means any local wildcard-like MACROs have to be part of the spec.
--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html