I think a WALLET RRtype extension would not change the need for some defining of the wallet mapping, as well as placing the requirement for authentication based on DNSSEC. There is an advantage of not overloading the TXT RRtype which has been used as a catch-all.
Forgive me, but I'm not clear if the WALLET RRtype is a proposal or if it has been ratified. I see references to it in the IANA registry so I'm assuming it has been assigned and is currently usable? On Tue, Sep 17, 2024 at 11:30 PM Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 17, 2024 at 11:09:12PM -0700, > Shay C <[email protected]> wrote > a message of 53 lines which said: > > > I was hoping to get feedback on an RFC draft I have been working on for > > web3 wallet mapping using DNSSEC and the DNS system. > > It would be interesting to discuss the relationship with the existing > WALLET RRtype. > >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
