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] Re: [db-wg] Proposal to change the syntax of "nserver:" attribute
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] Re: [db-wg] Proposal to change the syntax of "nserver:" attribute
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] Re: [db-wg] Proposal to change the syntax of "nserver:" attribute
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Peter Koch
pk at DENIC.DE
Fri May 26 12:31:51 CEST 2006
On Fri, May 26, 2006 at 10:17:57AM +0100, Jay Daley wrote: > dotted quad notation. So of the form 2001::0010:192.168.1.1 We had a > very long discussion about this with a registrar quoting RFCs back and > forth and in the end agreed to do it. yes, that won't hurt - whatever it's good for. The examples in section 2.2 of RFC 4291 show this format only for ::192.0.2.1 or ::FFFF:192.0.2.1 type addresses (without limiting it explicitly), and I'd rather not accept those. Whether or not the output format should be canonicalized is a different issue. Once you start it, it could be applied elsewhere (strip the trailing dot in domain names, adjust zip codes), but that's more the db wg's business. -Peter
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] Re: [db-wg] Proposal to change the syntax of "nserver:" attribute
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] Re: [db-wg] Proposal to change the syntax of "nserver:" attribute
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]