Re: consensus call of RR prefix

ietf-mxcomp

Re: consensus call of RR prefix

2004-09-05 00:25:00


On Sat, Sep 04, 2004 at 09:48:18PM -0400, Yakov Shafranovich wrote:


I would add to that that others in the IETF may use MARID as a 
precendent to argue for the use of TXT record. This may quickly increase 
the possible number of them. Therefore, I am for the prefix as well.



Correct. The reason to use a prefix is basically the same as to use
the _service._tcp prefix for SRV records (which are used for good
reasons).


regards
Hadmut

[More with this subject...]

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: consensus call of RR prefix, (continued) Re: consensus call of RR prefix, Bill McQuillan Re: consensus call of RR prefix, Daniel Senie Re: consensus call of RR prefix, william(at)elan.net Re: consensus call of RR prefix, jpinkerton RR prefix is not useful, John Levine Re: RR prefix is not useful, Rand Wacker Re: RR prefix is not useful, John R Levine Re: RR prefix is not useful, Yakov Shafranovich Re: consensus call of RR prefix, Hadmut Danisch Re: consensus call of RR prefix, Yakov Shafranovich Re: consensus call of RR prefix, Hadmut Danisch <= RE: consensus call of RR prefix, Michael R. Brumm RE: consensus call of RR prefix, william(at)elan.net RE: consensus call of RR prefix, terry RE: consensus call of RR prefix, william(at)elan.net Re: consensus call of RR prefix, David Blacka RE: consensus call of RR prefix, Max Kanat-Alexander Re: consensus call of RR prefix, Yakov Shafranovich Re: consensus call of RR prefix, Mark Lentczner Re: consensus call of RR prefix, william(at)elan.net Re: consensus call of RR prefix, william(at)elan.net

Previous by Date:	RE: consensus call on MUST/SHOULD language for TXT records, Michael R. Brumm
Next by Date:	Re: consensus call on MUST/SHOULD language for TXT records, Dave Crocker
Previous by Thread:	Re: consensus call of RR prefix, Yakov Shafranovich
Next by Thread:	RE: consensus call of RR prefix, Michael R. Brumm
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]