Subject: Re: Q1 followup - arguements against "MUST NOT" language

From: Edward Lewis <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 09:43:56 -0500

Also, what do you mean by "use" ;)

I'm leaning towards "MUST NOT compress domain names in the RDATA 
sections when assembling and transmitting a message."  (Includes 
dynamic update request messages when using this wording.)

1) Bytes compressed away in a SIG message are miniscule compared to 
the signature.

2) A response won't have many NXT's anyway (unlike NS records which 
may be numerous in a referral).

3) Assuming EDNS0 is going to enlarge the minimum maximum message 
size from 512, what's a few extra bytes.

At 13:40 -0500 2/12/03, Scott Rose wrote:
>The general consensus is that name compression in RDATA is A Bad Thing (tm),
>but there are some differences on the wording for the spec:
>
>Sub-Question:  What are the arguments against using the terms (1)"MUST NOT
>use name compression on DNS names in the RDATA on sending over the wire"
>(paraphrasing here) over (2)"SHOULD NOT use name compression on DNS names in
>the RDATA..."?
>
>Notes:
>     A.  (1) is the strength of the wording used in the unknown-rrs draft.
>There would be consistency.
>
>
>
>Scott
>
>
>
>
>--
>to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
>the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
>archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                          +1-703-227-9854
ARIN Research Engineer

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

---

From: "Scott Rose" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 10:43:48 -0500

That seems to be the prevailing winds - MUST NOT compress DNS names in the
RDATA (paraphrase).  Basically, change the DNSSEC specs to keep in line with
the unknown-rrs draft and namedroppers discussion.

Scott

---

From: Alexis Yushin <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 16:42:30 +0100 (CET)

I think that we should try to keep the standards as uniform as possible.
Making million exceptions to the rules is the ultimate Bad Thing (tm).

I dont see why name compression in RDATA is necessary a bad thing, I do
see that making different rules for different RR RDATA complicates the
standards, implementation and definitely introduces more potentional
interoperability issues.

Alexis