Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02

[wayne <wayne at schlitt.net>]

In <198A730C2044DE4A96749D13E167AD375A2AB9 at MOU1WNEXMB04.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker at verisign.com> writes:

> [PHB brainstorms about a new protocol...]
>
> The main objection to prefixed records is that they do not work with
> wildcards. This is actually a failure of imagination rather than fact.
> It is quite possible to develop a resolution procedure for prefix
> records that works acceptably with legacy DNS resolvers and meets the
> needs of network admins.
>
> [...]
>
> The way to do this is to introduce a pointer record using CNAME as
> follows:
>
> _prefix.exists.example.com        TXT     "Policy1"
> *.example.com                     CNAME   _wildcard.example.com
> _prefix._wildcard.example.com     TXT     "Policy2"

I don't believe this will work since CNAMEs have to be the only thing
in a given node, and so a wildcard CNAME would conflict with all other
wildcard usage, such as wildcard MX records.


-wayne


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf