Hi John,
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Stracke" <jstracke(_at_)incentivesystems(_dot_)com>
That is, if we start thinking about "8+ everywhere" instead of "ACE
everywhere" scenario, then how we can get there from here.
Same question: if you have a non-backwards-compatible server, how do
you
get people to use it?
Non-backwards-compatible server? A server that wont handle ASCII and only
handles UTF8... : >
No, a nameserver that won't handle the original form of DNS. The original
DNS packet format obviously can't cope with 8-bit labels, so a server that
sent native UTF-8 in its replies (or a resolver that sent native UTF-8 in
its queries) would break compatibility.
First of all, it is not "obvious" that the current "packet format" cannot
handle 8 bits because last time I checked, they operate in octets.
Secondly, the proposed nameserver will definitely handle the original form
of DNS... I dont understand what you are trying to say... I would not
expect a version 1.0 of a word processor to be able to read a Version 4.0
formatted document. Would you? But I would expect that the Ver 4.0 word
processor be able to read a Ver 1.0 doc. This is backwards compatible as I
understand it.
But, if you say that nameservers are not capable of handling EDNS, that is
true.
So, the idea is to respond in ACE if asked in ACE; respond in 8 if asked in
8 (also include the associated ACE to be used incase destination
servers...http/mail/etc... are not upgraded).
Edmon