Re: Send-N draft: draft-bellis-enum-send-n-02 published

Duane said:
> You say potato I say well who cares, the point is he was welcome to try
> the query for himself, the \\1 (dig adds the extra slash) and the .* in
> the NAPTR record should have tipped him off to the fact it was a wild card.

No, they merely show that a standard pattern was used.

> If I do the same query for +44800\d{1,10} and the results would be the
> same, yet if a send-n appears at a more specific location the result
> wouldn't be the same.

The same happens if you put an A record at a higher level. So don't do that.

But that's not "broken". It's "working correctly".

>> Given that Ray could not have known that you actually used an expanded
>> wildcard domain name, but assumed
>> that these are regular, unexpanded Resource Records, he asserted that
>> you would have a wildcard domain name at an ancestor name.
> Again, he was free to re-do the query himself if he did not understand
> what I was expressing,

And the response will fail to demonstrate that a wildcard was used.

> *sigh* You guys can keep pushing this all you want but you so far
> haven't shown why this shoul be accepted it has the potential to
> substantially increase load on DNS and cause looping all of which would
> need to be dealt with as special cases and even if it was passed as a
> NAPTR type the DNS guys would most certainly have a beef with all the
> additional queries.

Actually, it has the potential to greatly reduce the number of queries. As
Ray has pointed out, it reduces 11 queries to 3 or 4.

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather  | Work:  <[email protected]>   | Tel:    +44 20 8495 6138
Internet Expert     | Home:  <[email protected]>  | Fax:    +44 870 051 9937
Demon Internet      | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Mobile: +44 7973 377646
THUS plc            |                            |