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


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 17:26:16 -0400
In-Reply-To: <a05111b06babb8d682bd7@[192.149.252.108]>
Sender: owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] References for Today's Host Object Discussion


On Thursday, Apr 10, 2003, at 17:17 Canada/Eastern, Edward Lewis wrote:

> Would excluding MX's (et.al.) be too shortsighted for our 
> extensibility (E of EPP)?

If we can add them using extensions, I would say that is plenty of 
support.

> Would only considering NS's and glue be sufficient for EPP 1.0?

I would say yes.

[My previous comment was really just a clarification of what it was I 
was talking about, and not any kind of opinion that RRs other than NS 
and glue should be supported in the base set of documents.]


Joe


Home | Date list | Subject list