I have made a new draft https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chins-dnsop-web3-wallet-mapping/
- Separated the forward mapping and reverse mapping. Will propose a ID for reverse mapping separately. - Removed DEFAULT record because it had the potential to return incorrect records Cheers Shay On Sun, Nov 17, 2024 at 9:49 PM Shay C <[email protected]> wrote: > The WALLET RRtype is already assigned as a DNS parameter > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-parameters/WALLET/wallet-completed-template > > We are trying to get consensus on the operational usage of that RRtype. > The TXT record fallback is also included as well as reverse lookup > mechanisms. > > On Sun, Nov 17, 2024 at 6:20 AM Petr Menšík <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Why don't we use URI instead? Maybe with prefix _wallet? Is introduction >> of a new type necessary, when it seems like scheme:address format anyway? >> >> On 18/09/2024 17:44, Dave Lawrence wrote: >> > Joe Abley writes: >> >>> Would it be recommended to do a proposal that use either RRtype >> >>> (TXT or WALLET) or choose one? >> >> I haven't read your proposal and don't have an opinion on that. I >> >> agree that it sounds like a good question for you to ask yourself. >> > You don't have an opinion on using TXT? >> > >> > I'm somewhat surprised by this. >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] >> > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >> >> -- >> Petr Menšík >> Software Engineer, RHEL >> Red Hat, https://www.redhat.com/ >> PGP: DFCF908DB7C87E8E529925BC4931CA5B6C9FC5CB >> >> _______________________________________________ >> DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] >> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >> >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
