S Moonesamy wrote: > At 01:32 30-04-2013, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > >I am not sure what you think is unclear. Note that the definition of > >the typedef domain-name is unchanged from the one in RFC 6021. Perhaps > >you can make a concrete text change proposal so I better understand > >what your concern is. > > I read draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6021-bis-02. In Section 4: > > "The domain-name type represents a DNS domain name. The > name SHOULD be fully qualified whenever possible." > > That sounds like a MAY. That is a MAY. That probably needs to be a may. How do you recognize a "fully qualified" name anyway? Today a huge number of machines simply does not have a "fully qualified domain name" (and uses private address space). My DSL router (a brand that is pretty common in Germany) does _not_ provide a domain name via DHCP and will resolve plain hostnames for all addresses that it hands out via DHCP. And a lot of stuff that you attach to home networks comes with a Web-UI (my DVB-S Set-Top Box, my HomeNAS, my DSL-router (although the latter recognizes "fritz.box" as a name for itself). -Martin