[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[6bone] Re: reverse 6dns painful (was Re:reverse DNSconsideredpointless)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gert Doering" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2004 1:48 PM
Subject: Re: [6bone] Re: reverse 6dns painful (was Re:reverse DNSconsideredpointless)
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2004 at 12:02:43PM +0100, Lukas Beeler wrote:
> > * Gert Doering <[email protected]>:
> > > On Fri, Feb 13, 2004 at 12:37:04PM -0700, Colin Faber wrote:
> > > > Additionally unless I'm mistaken that standard still does not allow
> > > > underscores '_' (something that MS ADS uses in host names)
> > > The fact that MS doesn't adhere to the standard doesn't mean the *standard*
> > > needs changing ("that standard still does not allow...").
> > Citing http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2782.txt:
> Good point. Now the interesting question is - are the authors of RFC2782
> aware that they violate DNS host name requirements, or are they even
> doing it *on purpose*, so that...
> > | The symbolic name of the desired service, as defined in Assigned
> > | Numbers [STD 2] or locally. An underscore (_) is prepended to
> > | the service identifier to avoid collisions with DNS labels that
> > | occur in nature.
> ... no clash with "proper" DNS names can occur?
There's another RFC, don't remember the number, _suggesting_ that underscore should be a valid character.
There are a lot of unix os' filterering non-standard characters at the resolver level. As Jeroen said: "Nevertheless a protocol is a
standard the second it reaches critical mass." Since there are TLD providers supporting almost raw UTF8 like .NU (I even know of a
registrar supporting UTF16), not talking particulary about underscore here, I would say that it has already or will soon reach
> However, this is not really IPv6 related.
Just a tad.