Re: [dnsext] Re: DNAME-bis issues (was: [DNSOP] new draft about idn tld variant implementation)

[Andrew Sullivan <ajs@shinkuro.com>]

Dear colleagues,

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 05:54:18PM +1100, Mark Andrews wrote:
> 
> DNAME's placement is the same as any ordinary resource record (e.g.
> MX, TXT).  There is nothing special about where DNAME can or can't
> be used.

While that is true, quite plainly the current dname-bis draft doesn't
leave everyone with that impression.  We need proposed text to make
the intent clearer.  Can someone please propose it?  Given the
emergence of this issue, the document is clearly not ready for
advancement, and it needs to be fixed before we send it on.

A


-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@shinkuro.com
Shinkuro, Inc.