From owner-freebsd-net Mon Aug 7 11:11:18 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mail2.netcologne.de (mail2.netcologne.de [194.8.194.103]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 231D937BC95 for ; Mon, 7 Aug 2000 11:09:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pherman@frenchfries.net) Received: from bagabeedaboo.security.at12.de (dial-195-14-254-210.netcologne.de [195.14.254.210]) by mail2.netcologne.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA10958; Mon, 7 Aug 2000 20:09:39 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from localhost (localhost.security.at12.de [127.0.0.1]) by bagabeedaboo.security.at12.de (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id e77I9Sq02891; Mon, 7 Aug 2000 20:09:28 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 20:09:28 +0200 (CEST) From: Paul Herman To: Randy Bush Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: apparently FreeBSD-specific DNS failure In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Randy Bush wrote: > >>> '_' is not a valid character for DNS host names. > >> bzzzt! see rfc 2181 sec 11 > > I think you might have read that wrong. > > uh, i wrote it, not read it. Yes, after rereading it I see now you do mean binary octets. I must say, reading it is ambiguous, and you don't explicitly state that each octet MAY take on all values, or if not, which ones. If I were writing a DNS stack based on this, that would give me many unanswered questions. Perhaps it would also be a good idea (purely for sake of clarity) to indeed reference the RFCs in the same breath which it would be obsoleting while making those proposals (as did RFC1123.) I think that would even be more clear. What luck! I've got the author himself on the horn. When do we get to use umlauts in our domain names here in Germany? :) -Paul. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message