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

From: "Scott Rose" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 07:30:30 -0500

Though it isn't just my opinion, there seems to be some concensus around the
WG that name compression in the RDATA of the DNSSEC RRs (SIG and NXT).
Generally, that it is a not something desired.

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.

The same requirements should not be applied to the resolver. i.e. that
resolvers should still accept and process RRs that use name compression in
the next domain name field of the NXT RR and signer's name of the SIG RR.

--
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: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 07:11:30 +1100

> On Tue, 11 Feb 2003, Scott Rose wrote:
> 
> > changed to indicated that name compression "SHOULD NOT" be used when
> > sending security RRs over the wire?
> 
> yes, but I would prefer a MUST NOT.
> 
> 	jakob
> 
seconded.
--
Mark Andrews, Internet Software Consortium
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: [email-masked]