Daniel,
If client and server do no share at least one MUST, then there will be
non-interoperability.
DQ> Yes. It would also be nice if the world could avoid doing duplicate DNS
DQ> queries for spf2 records.
My concern is not about efficiency. It is about the fundamental ability
to get any successful interoperability.
If there is no core requirement for support of a particular record type,
then there will be clients that support only one record type and servers
that support only another. This means that the clients will not be able
to access the information.
The instant you talk about "duplicate queries" you are assuming that the
client supports more than one type. The question is whether they are
required to. That is, do they have a MUST for each type?
DQ> so I hope
DQ> that is addressed in the next revision of the specifications. One or
DQ> the other forever or both with a pre-specified flag day in the
DQ> not-too-distant future.
For Internet-scale services there can be no such thing as a flag day.
There is not central authority to assert it. Even if there were, there
is no way to coordinate that scale of operation. Even centrally
controlled companies cannot do flag-days for large-scale deployment
changes.
d/
--
Dave Crocker <dcrocker-at-brandenburg-dot-com>
Brandenburg InternetWorking <www.brandenburg.com>
Sunnyvale, CA USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>