On 12-Mar-2008, at 08:51, Pekka Savola wrote:

> If we want to mandate EDNS0 to be part of every compliant DNS
> implementation, I believe we should put that requirement in the
> upcoming profile or other BCP/standards track document (which in
> turn the vendor could claim to implement or not).


I actually like the idea of making the statement in the EDNS0bis
document, and marking that document as "standards track; updates RFC
1035". That way people who claim to support 1034/1035 (or who
undertake to provide such support) might be guided towards the light.

Including the sentiment in the profile document also seems sensible,
however.

As to the original question, it seems sensible to me that DNS software
and services MUST support EDNS0, insofar as an IETF MUST ever has any
meaning outside the scope of standards development.


Joe


--
to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: