[dropping dnsop]
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Dave Crocker <dhc@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Dave Crocker <dhc@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Specifically referring to Section 3 of> draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05, there is not such thing as a "NULLBy my reading of that section, it is defining the term, if only by
> MX Resource Record". There is only an MX Resource Record that
> this specification proposes to use with a convention involving
> specific content in the DATA. One could call that many things,
> but "NULL MX Resource Record" isn't one of them.
virtue of the way it is used in the name of that section.
Perhaps your confusion would be resolved if the term had a comma in it,
so: NULL, MX Record?
In other words, NULL is an adjective within the term.
If you would prefer a different term, please suggest one.
I mentioned this to one of the co-authors privately, but since you just reminded me of it, I'll mention it here too:
The use of NULL (i.e., in all-caps) makes me think of it more as either an acronym or a mnemonic. For example, in C, the special pointer with address zero is written in prose as "the null pointer", but in source code simply as "NULL". Since this draft is more prose than code, my sensibilities would prefer it be written as "null" in this document rather than "NULL". In its current form, I might expect to find a special RR type definition for NULL MX and/or corresponding definitions in the appropriate C header files.
This is not a major point since I'm the only one to mention it so far, but there you have it.
-MSK
-MSK