On Mon, Dec 08, 2008 at 10:37:36AM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
DNS" that were completely different in their origin. Almsot none were
protocol-related, most were operational but some were not even linked
to DNS operations, they were layer 8 and 9 issues (such as the
registrar transfer problem in ICANNland) and completely offtopic for
the IETF.
Well, to the extent that the real-world application of the protocol --
even several layers up -- turns out to be more difficult than simple
reading of the protocol specification would suggest, we have a problem
that is _not_ off-topic for the IETF. That problem is how to make
this very flexible protocol safe for use in the network that actually
exists.
There is a tendency among those of us who are familiar with DNS to
say, "Well, that's not what you're supposed to do," when we hear the
horror stories people have about DNS problems. But if we really want
people to use names instead of addresses all the time, then we need to
ask ourselves why, in spite of the built-in resilience of DNS, relying
on DNS often makes an application less resilient. If the explanation
turns out to be exclusively things like the layer 8 and 9 issues
you're talking about, then let's work on fixing them (or come up with
a tech fix to route around that damage). I suspect, however, that
we'll find ambiguities in the specifications that make certain kinds
of implementations hard. We should fix that, too (and dnsext is
trying).
A
--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs(_at_)shinkuro(_dot_)com
Shinkuro, Inc.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf