To:
Joe Abley <jabley@isc.org>
Cc:
Edward Lewis <edlewis@arin.net>, "Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>, "'ietf-provreg@cafax.se'" <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>
From:
Edward Lewis <edlewis@arin.net>
Date:
Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:45:22 -0400
In-Reply-To:
<A40712D6-6B93-11D7-A6F5-00039312C852@isc.org>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: [ietf-provreg] References for Today's Host Object Discussion
Speaking as a DNS person - you don't need glue for MX's because you get that from the A records sitting at the NS-named machines. You need NS glue because there's nowhere else to get the A records other than NS-named machines. (Speaking grossly.) In the example below, "smtp.example2 A" isn't glue, it's part of the "something." zone. At 16:33 -0400 4/10/03, Joe Abley wrote: >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 -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Edward Lewis +1-703-227-9854 ARIN Research Engineer ...as rare as a fire at a sushi bar...