ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: provisioning software, was DNS RRTYPEs, the difficulty with

2012-03-03 10:29:29
On Saturday, March 03, 2012 05:05:08 PM Patrik Fältström wrote:
On 3 mar 2012, at 16:56, ned+ietf(_at_)mauve(_dot_)mrochek(_dot_)com wrote:
Doubtful. If a record needs to have, say, a priority field, or a port
number, given the existence of MX, SRV, and various other RRs it's
going to be very difficult for the designers of said field to argue
that that should be done as ASCII text that has to be parsed out to
use.

Agree with you but too many people today "just" program in perl och python
where the parsing is just a cast or similar, and they do not understand
this argument of yours -- which I once again completely stand behind
myself.

There's a design trade off here that one should not over generalize about.  
Sometimes an ASCII text record will be fine, in other cases, it probably won't. 
 
Making the 'easy' case really easy so that new RRTypes get traction is a 
worthwhile goal.  It certainly won't apply to all new RRTypes and so claims 
that it's not a universal solution don't mean it's not useful.

Scott K
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>