Subject: [Asrg] abstraction for standardization of testing names (not codes)

From: "David Nicol" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2008 12:54:34 -0500

On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 12:30 PM, Mark E. Mallett <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
>  But for something simple,  just 'test' doesn't seem all that bad.
>

there could be a registry of result types, and what the service provides
as a response for each category could be returned for CATEGORY.test

things like
       no-complaint-in-last-year.test
       recent-complaint.test
       no-data.test
       listing-disputed.test
       convicted-felon.test

this would allow automatic configuration of client software against
conforming services without having to agree on the meanings of the
final octet in 127.0.0.x; it would also provide a migration path to
IPv6, and all the other goodness that comes with an additional layer
of abstraction, such as agreeing on meanings of strings-of-words
rather than agreeing on meanings of bits, and freedom from specifying
the result return mechanism at all --- maybe some kind of private
commercial DNSBL could store up all the requests from a particular
DNS client and communicate a packed result over a secure channel
or something (i am not suggesting to do that, just pointing out that
there are alternatives to returning A records)

This proposal would constitute a new feature rather than a BCP, of course;
if it is a good idea the BCP could refer to standardized testing names
as an external work in progress rather than enumerating them to be
forward-compatible.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg