Re: Minor editorial change to draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps

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

 



>> i would offer to put my keyboard where my mouth is.  but i fear that,
>> at the bottom, i would have the unreasonable desire for dns classes
>> to support these kinds of things.  i.e. i don't think we have a clean
>> fix.  but it would be nice to document the good with the bad.
> 
> That sounds like a solution, not a motivation. That is, you care about
> the problem hypothetically, and have a hypothetical solution. In
> practice when weʼve talked about using dns classes to solve problems
> that have motivated rfc6761 allocations, it hasnʼt really helped,
> because the infrastructure required to use them this way is not
> present, and this isnʼt how they were originally intended to be used.
> 
> For example, is ICANN.org with a different class not a subdomain of
> the .org TLD? Would ICANN not object to us designating it for use by
> someone else?  I suspect yes, and I wouldnʼt blame them.

sorry.  maybe it would have helped if i had put UNREASONABLE DESIRE in
upper case.

randy





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