Re: Fwd: ISSUE: Checkgroups control messages
Russ Allbery <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.usenet.format |
|---|---|
| Organization | The Eyrie |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
"Charles Lindsey" <[email protected]> writes: > Julien ÉLIE <[email protected]> wrote: >> I do not think it wise to limit this number to 32768 because one could >> not use DNS serial numbers (which are practical). 2^31=2147483648 >> would be better, at least. It could be said that implementations >> should except <chksernr> arguments to be a 32-bit integer. And that >> the (unsigned) integer should be less than 2^32. > Yes, I agree that any number expressed in 32 bit would be better. Can > Russ quietly slip it in? It seems like a reasonable change to me, but I'd like to get more opinions from the working group just to be sure. -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>