This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/dns-wg@ripe.net/
[dns-wg] FYI: IANA delegation procedure for the root zone and ipv6 glue
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] FYI: IANA delegation procedure for the root zone and ipv6 glue
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] FYI: IANA delegation procedure for the root zone and ipv6 glue
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Peter Koch
pk at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE
Thu Jul 22 11:52:27 CEST 2004
Daniel Karrenberg wrote: > This wording indeed has its origin in section 1 of > http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/ipv6/publications/v6rootglue.pdf I had already read that paper. The term "reasonable queries" appears exactly once and even then it is not defined but states that "response sizes for reasonable queries do not exceed the 512 octet limit". That's where we started. > which explains why *any* query would be a stupid wording. The rest of your paper suggests that "reasonable" may mean a query pattern that is found in real life at a (subset of the) root nameserver(s). At least that would sound not unreasonable to me. But we're talking about a policy document here - why does that use/have to use such fuzzy wording? -Peter
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] FYI: IANA delegation procedure for the root zone and ipv6 glue
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] FYI: IANA delegation procedure for the root zone and ipv6 glue
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]