Mark Nottingham <[email protected]> wrote: > So, vendor extension namespaces make sense when they need a > 'playground' to operate within for instance-to-instance > interoperability. How would that work here -- what's the case for a > "vendor-specific" database that *isn't* referred to by others?
I thought that this was dealing with the part: mcr> 2) we want to allow the set of errors to be easily extended by many different mcr> resolvers and databases (as you clarified) mcr> who have an increasing and many obtuse set of filtering mcr> conditions. So when we get a new filtering that says that domains with adjacent vowels forbidden, rule 4Q8NQ from a coalition of western (Albertan, Saskatchewan) separatists attacking the other 7 provinces (the other 7 have adajacent vowels, but ya gotta think bilingually. I should be asleep). When non-Canadian users wonder, they get a nice explanation in their language. Unless my work is wrong, I think it's a really good^Wbad, absolutely insane example. -- ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | IoT architect [ ] [email protected] http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
