But then record being discussed is basicly same as TXT with its own RR
type, so I doubt it would take long to program dns client and server to
use it just like TXT (I would imagine it can be done within days) and
Microsoft would release a patches then. The programs released for windows
that want to use new record can just include the patch as part of their
initial release and install it if it has not been done already.
Similarly those running dns server (and microsoft dns server is not too
popular even for those using windows machines) that want to publish the
record can install the patch as well. Now after this initial patch to just
read new dns rr type, Microsoft might want to work on DLL/API to be able
to parse this record type and understand it (assuming you go for integration
of callerid with spf) but I would ask Microsoft to release this separately
and dont wait until such dll is written and release updates for dns asap.
On Thu, 20 May 2004, Bob Atkinson wrote:
It is not possible to do this on Windows. Publishing a new RR type, or
even querying for one, requires a rev to the OS.
The short of the reason is that (for whatever reason; please don't
flame) Windows only exposes type-specific DNS APIs; there thus is no way
to set or query for new types.
The same is true wrt the configuration of Windows DNS servers: the
parser for the file format (which is sometimes a file, sometimes active
directory), as well as the GUI wizard-like tool that one uses to edit
same, are each RR-type specific and have no provision for new RR types.
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ietf-mxcomp(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org [mailto:owner-ietf-
mxcomp(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Meng Weng Wong
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 1:03 AM
To: Greg Connor
Cc: IETF MARID WG
Subject: suggested new RRtype experiment
On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 09:15:21PM -0700, Greg Connor wrote:
|
| My feeling is that reusing TXT (or SRV or A records for that matter)
is a
| bit of a hack. It is acceptable, but not optimal. Shifting the
label to
| add _spf or _ep or whatever is even more of a hack. BOTH of these
are
| considerably-less-than-perfect replacements for getting our own
record
| type, which is IMO the RIGHT answer.
|
Could someone with Copious Free Time (probably meaning someone not
attending the meeting :) please do an experiment and try publishing a
MARID type record using existing but relatively up to date DNS server
software? And post a commentary on the process and what you learned
along the way. For purposes of this experiment, allocate yourself a
new RRtype preferably in the experimental space. Getting to the point
where a dig returns an SPF record but with rrtype=MARID would be a
win.