Re: Update of RFC 2606 based on the recent ICANN changes ?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





Keith Moore wrote:
...
Many, many working groups have looked at the problems associated with relative names and determined that they're not acceptable. It's a "bug" that relative names are forbidden in these apps, nor that the final "." is implicit and in many cases disallowed. These are carefully considered design features. (for instance, forbidding the final "." makes it simpler to compare domain names for equivalence.)

It's nonsensical for an application to decide that relative names are unacceptable, but to require users to input names as relative.

An explicit trailing '.' has either no impact on comparison or can only help. If all names have the '.' impicitly, it can be chopped off as redundant when it is provided by the user. If the '.' is not implicit, then you're preventing the user from providing it.

All the '.' does is inhibit the resolver from trying a list of suffixes in succession; its presence makes resolution and comparison easier, not harder.

Joe

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]