Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
Now who's the one re-opening the topic?
I thought you were, but if that's not the case we can drop this
part of the discussion.
I don't care what the "don't" reasons are anymore. I'm saying
we have to document them so that implementors understand the
reasons it was deliberately omitted
For wildcard considerations a reference to RFC 4592 is a start,
+/- http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iab-dns-synthesis-concerns
The http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iab-dns-choices draft might
also help. It's a set of non-trivial technical DNS issues, IMO
ADSP shouldn't try to explain technical details of a (rejected)
approach. In parts this is still controversial, e.g., Phil's
"superwildcard" idea might be good or bad.
Is that suggestion really such lunacy?
Dunno, depends on how deep you want to dig into this (rat)hole.
For some points I would know what they are about, but I don't
know enough about DNS to tackle a documentation in an ADSP I-D.
Frank
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html