[dns-wg] TLD delegation trade-offs
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] TLD delegation trade-offs
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] TLD delegation trade-offs
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com
bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com
Tue Jun 7 17:47:43 CEST 2005
> > now if i understood Ed, both he and you are tangentially > > arguing for in-baliwick glue. why was this considered such > > bad practice last decade, but now seems to be not only > > prefered but the only choice for right-thinking people? > > dig @f.gtld-servers.com figwort.arin.net a > > (Meant as an example only. Look at the flags, no RA, no AA, but > ANCOUNT > 0 and the rest of the message looks like a referral.) > > This crutch will have to be removed for DNSSEC (or DNSSEC will have > to bend around it). When the crutch is removed, antique name servers > will start to fall over. just for grins... how would DNSSEC "bend" around this supporting girder (or crutch if you prefer). > Edward Lewis +1-571-434-5468 --bill
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] TLD delegation trade-offs
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] TLD delegation trade-offs
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]