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

In message 
<9452079D1A51524AA5749AD23E00392807EFEF(_at_)exch-mbx901(_dot_)corp.cloudmark.c
om>, "Murray S. Kucherawy" writes:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org 
> > [mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Mar
> k Andrews
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 3:28 PM
> > To: mrex(_at_)sap(_dot_)com
> > Cc: johnl(_at_)iecc(_dot_)com; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
> > Subject: Re: provisioning software, was DNS RRTYPEs, the difficulty with
> >
> > > Maybe you believe that NOTIMP should be limited to unsupported OPCODES on
> ly?
> > > But that is definitely not what the spec says.
> > Yet someone else that can't count beyond 1035.
> Weren't you the one that said "Actually it is STD 13.  Get over it." earlier 
> in this thread?
Randy claimed that presentation formats were not standardised.  They
are.  Randy and others claimed that the presentation formats were
owned by BIND and they are not.

I never claimed that STD 13 was the be all and end all w.r.t. DNS.

STD 13 didn't follow the normal process required to make a STD.
There are lots of corrections to STD 13 in the RFC series.

> I looked at least at the titles of all the documents that update 1035, and no
> ne of them appear to be related to the above.  So where should we be looking?
>
> -MSK
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka(_at_)isc(_dot_)org
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf