To:
Edward Lewis <edlewis@arin.net>
Cc:
"Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>, "'ietf-provreg@cafax.se'" <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>
From:
Joe Abley <jabley@isc.org>
Date:
Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:33:08 -0400
In-Reply-To:
<a05111b04babb3a18bc67@[192.136.135.238]>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: [ietf-provreg] References for Today's Host Object Discussion
On Thursday, Apr 10, 2003, at 11:27 Canada/Eastern, Edward Lewis wrote: > As far as the MX RR issue, as a protocol person, I think that I can > see why you would limit the EPP core spec to doing just the A > records. IMO, the A record - and I should point out that we have to > be IP version fair according to our requirements - or the AAAA or any > other experimental/future address record is a special case here. > Only address records are eligible to be glue in DNS, MX's and others > aren't. Some MX records might need glue just as some NS records need glue: $ORIGIN something. example1 NS ns1.example1 example1 NS felix.automagic.org. ns1.example1 A 199.212.93.1 example2 MX 10 smtp.example2 example2 MX 20 felix.automagic.org. smtp.example2 A 199.212.92.1 Is MX (and friends) vs. A really the comparison you should be making? Or should it be MX (and friends) vs. NS? Joe