Re: rsync vs. axfr-clarify (was: in support of axfr-clarify)

[Derek Atkins <derek@ihtfp.com>]

"D. J. Bernstein" <djb@cr.yp.to> writes:

> Derek Atkins writes:
> > Religious nonsense, eh?
> 
> Yes. Instead of rationally evaluating the costs and benefits of two
> different protocol extension mechanisms, you declare that one mechanism
> (new query types) is ``part of the protocol,'' while the other one (new
> ports) is ``out of band'' and therefore not subject to discussion here.

Could you answer me how AXFR can be considered a "new query type" or
even a "protcol extension"?  It seems to be defined as far back as
RFC-883, which, if memory serves, is the original DNS definition....
Therefore, it would seem to imply that it is a core DNS element,
having been there from the beginning.  If people have found problems
with the AXFR then that would certainly be within scope of this list.

> That's religious nonsense.

Well, I'm very sorry you feel that way.  This _IS_ the namedroppers
list after all, for discussion of the DNS protocol (of which AXFR is
clearly part).  I am certainly open to the concept of using alternate
methods (outside the DNS protocol) to transmit DNS information, but it
is quite frankly out of scope for the DNS protocol discussion list.

Such discussion _may_ be appropriate for a DNS operations mailing
list, but last I checked this was not such a list.

-derek

-- 
       Derek Atkins
       Computer and Internet Security Consultant
       derek@ihtfp.com             www.ihtfp.com

--
to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>