On Jun 17, 2025, at 10:54, Joe Abley <[email protected]> wrote:
> Using "." to mean "not available" has some history and it feels nice not to
> deviate;
I would generally agree, but in this case noname (".") has a particular meaning
in the DNS that it doesn't in, for example MX records. Thus my concern.
> also I'm not sure what other name we could use that would not cause different
> headaches.
Any real name would cause other problems, definitely. It's a balancing act,
which is why I hope that y'all have done some measurements with existing
resolvers to (help) assure that there are no obvious problems.
> But I agree choosing a different special target just for this would
> conceptually be some kind of solution if it turns out there is a problem.
Good, because I really like the use case for the draft and the simplicity of
the proposed solution.
--Paul Hoffman
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
