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 17:17:07 -0400
In-Reply-To:
<0FA06CB8-6B96-11D7-A6F5-00039312C852@isc.org>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: [ietf-provreg] References for Today's Host Object Discussion
Speaking as co-chair - Hmmm. I have been under the assumption that we were talking about provisioning domain names, yes, provreg is chartered to be more general but in the short term we've focused on domain names, hence the only DNS records would be NS's and glue for the time being. Would excluding MX's (et.al.) be too shortsighted for our extensibility (E of EPP)? Would only considering NS's and glue be sufficient for EPP 1.0? In an attempt to focus the discussion, however, I'd lean towards restricting ourselves towards concentrating on the NS & glue case and not on the MX case. (MX might not be the only one that could be added.) It's not that I want to suffocate new ideas in the WG, but it is better to meet the original goal first before expanding the mission. At 16:50 -0400 4/10/03, Joe Abley wrote: >I've seen more than one ccTLD zone that started off looking like that (indeed, >that started off with NS records in the zone being a rarity, and A, MX and TXT >records being much more common). -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Edward Lewis +1-703-227-9854 ARIN Research Engineer ...as rare as a fire at a sushi bar...