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

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

 




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.

it's nonsensical for you to unilaterally declare that such names are relative, when well over two decades of practice indicates otherwise.

(and remember, some of these apps predate DNS and the whole notion of relative names)

it's almost as if the very concept of relative names in DNS is itself a bug - especially if you insist that handling of DNS names be absolutely uniform from one app to the next. IMHO they cause far more problems than they're worth.

Keith
_______________________________________________

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]