Subject: RE: I-D ACTION:draft-iab-dns-choices-00.txt

From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 07:46:44 -0700

So you are referring to a proposal that isn't being made
rather than the proposal that has been made.

So now we have that sorted out we can take it that your
objections are withdrawn or can at any rate be ignored.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Mark Andrews
> Sent: Friday, October 22, 2004 10:36 PM
> To: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-iab-dns-choices-00.txt 
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > > 	The valid technical arguement is that there is no way
> > > 	to safely sub-type TXT.
> > 
> > That claim is utterly untrue. Prefixed TXT records are
> > perfectly safe, nobody has tried to make the claim that
> > there is any risk involved.
> > 
> > The only claim made is that certain wildcard features
> > don't work in the optimal way in the legacy servers.
> > 
> > That is certainly not a safety argument and trying FUD
> > will not help.
> 
> 	You are confused about what I mean by sub-type.  SIG and
> 	RRSIG are example of sub-typing.  The rdata contains sub-type
> 	information.
> 
> 	The proof of concept tried to sub-type TXT by having a
> 	prefix string in the record.
> 
> 	Mark
> --
> Mark Andrews, ISC
> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: [email-masked]
> 

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

---

From: Mark Andrews <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 08:20:03 +1000

> objections are withdrawn or can at any rate be ignored.

	No.  Even with a prefix you still have the sub-type problem.

	With a prefix you have the problem that you can't implement
	this with every possible mta name.  You have the problem that
	it doesn't work with wildcards (your own admission).  These
	prefix problems will not go away with time.  Nor will
	the fact that none of use owns the namespace once it has
	been delegated.  We made a mistake with SRV, we are trying
	not to compound that mistake.

	You started with the premise that adding a new type would
	take a long time and looked for a solution that didn't
	involve a new type.  I think I have proved that your initial
	premise was based on FUD.  It can be also demonstated that
	a new type is a technically superior solution to sub-type /
	prefix.

	Mark