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

Re: Q1: Should we allow name compression in the RDATA of DNSSEC RRs?

To: "Scott Rose" <scottr@nist.gov>
Subject: Re: Q1: Should we allow name compression in the RDATA of DNSSEC RRs?
From: gson@nominum.com (Andreas Gustafsson)
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 17:08:13 -0800 (PST)
Cc: <namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>
In-reply-to: <007c01c2d1c9$5da52190$b9370681@barnacle>
References: <007c01c2d1c9$5da52190$b9370681@barnacle>

Scott Rose writes:
> Q:  Should the text in the Resource Records draft of the DNSSEC spec be
> changed to indicated that name compression "SHOULD NOT" be used when sending
> security RRs over the wire?  This only applies to the "signer's name" field
> of the SIG RR and "next domain name" of the NXT RR.
>     note:  "SHOULD NOT" would be the suggestion.  "MUST NOT" may be too
> strong, but if that is the concensus, then that will be the language.

It should be changed to MUST NOT.  A SHOULD NOT would be inconsistent
with the unknown-rrs draft.
-- 
Andreas Gustafsson, gson@nominum.com

--
to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

References:
- Q1: Should we allow name compression in the RDATA of DNSSEC RRs?
  - From: "Scott Rose" <scottr@nist.gov>

Prev by Date: Re: Q2: crypto algorithm requirements for DNSSEC
Next by Date: Re: Q2: crypto algorithm requirements for DNSSEC
Previous by thread: Re: Q1: Should we allow name compression in the RDATA of DNSSEC RRs?
Next by thread: Q2: crypto algorithm requirements for DNSSEC
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread