# Re: Question for DNS propronents?

Paul Hoffman (ietf-lists@proper.com)
Wed, 14 Jun 1995 20:35:48 -0700

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Paul Hoffman: "Re: UR Accessors"
- Previous message: Paul Hoffman: "Re: Question for DNS propronents?"
- Maybe in reply to: Michael Mealling: "Question for DNS propronents?"
- Next in thread: Keith Moore: "Re: Question for DNS propronents?"

    Message-Id: <v02120c22ac05531cb7a9@[165.227.40.35]>

    Date: Wed, 14 Jun 1995 20:35:48 -0700

    To: roxanab@attmail.com

    From: ietf-lists@proper.com (Paul Hoffman)

    Subject: Re: Question for DNS propronents?

>So what I would
>suggest is that perhaps instead of trying to focus on converging the
>solutions maybe we focus on interoperability for now (even if it's
>only among some of the proposals and not all) at the syntax and protocol
>level. Based on my reading of the proposals I think this doable. What do
>other folks (especially those with proposals) think about this?

That's why Ron and I came up with the overview and the syntax documents.
They give an overall structure but allow many different solutions to
resolution.
draft-ietf-uri-urn-res-descrip-00
draft-ietf-uri-urn-syntax-00

We also proposed one solution that can coexist with any of the others that
people want to add to the structure.
draft-ietf-uri-urn-x-dns-2-00

To date, we haven't heard much criticism of the structure, and it still
seems like it is fairly broad and inclusive.

--Paul Hoffman
--Proper Publishing

- Next message: Paul Hoffman: "Re: UR Accessors"
- Previous message: Paul Hoffman: "Re: Question for DNS propronents?"
- Maybe in reply to: Michael Mealling: "Question for DNS propronents?"
- Next in thread: Keith Moore: "Re: Question for DNS propronents?"