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

Re: [IPSECKEY] new draft revision (00b)





>   Options are now:
>   1) (add) byte to distinguish type.
>      wire-encode item:	 FQDN) as wire-encode FQDN.
> 			 IPv4) as D.C.B.A.in-addr.arpa. FQDN
> 			 IPv6) as blah.ip6.arpa. FQDN
>
>   2) byte to distinguish type.
>      FQDN)   wire-encode item
>      IPv4)   4 bytes
>      IPv6)   16 bytes
>
>   3) byte to distinguish type. byte(?) to give length.
No need for lenght if domain name is the defined type.
>      string:	 FQDN) as string format FQDN: "sentry.foo.example."
> 		 IPv4) "A.B.C.D"
> 		 IPv6) "2008:efc::500"
My suggestion was intented be:
		IPv4) "A.B.C.D."   or "A\.B\.C\.D."  # pick only one.
		IPv6) "2008:efc::500."


From my prespective 2) is the least extensible, as new address types need
master servers to be updated.

Advantages to each:
1) punts the problem on interpreation completly into the application
   new address types can be introduced and are transparent to DNS.

2) Most compact

3) more Compact than 1)
    transparent
    Application is the only entity interpreting

Disadvantages:
1) wasteful encoding
2) master servers need updating when new address type is introduced.

3) missing trailing dot may cause bad side-effects.

I do not care which one of 1 or 3 is picked,
I did not like 2 when Michael proposed that and I still do not like it.

	Olafur

-
This is the IPSECKEY@sandelman.ca list.
Email to ipseckey-request@sandelman.ca to be removed.