Subject: Re: base32 alphabet rant - rhaaaaa rfc3548

From: Roy Arends <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:17:54 +0200 (CEST)

On Mon, 24 Oct 2005, Peter Koch wrote:

> Paul Vixie wrote:
>
>> ideally we would allocate an extended label type that said "it's 8-bit
>> binary data, without case folding" and the presentation format for it
>> would be the similar to what we use for unknown RR types, or bitstring
>> labels.
>
> this could also elegantly solve the "paradox problem", where the NSEC3 chain
> denies its owners' existance.

Does it matter wrt the paradox problem if a label exists at labeltype 00 
or labeltype 0100002 ?

Roy

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

---

From: Ben Laurie <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 11:29:58 +0100

> denies its owners' existance. 

It could? How? Are you suggesting that different label types are somehow
in different spaces?

Hmm. Now here's a fun problem. If an 8-bit label type is introduced and
used for anything other than NSEC3, then how does it work with NSEC?
Canonical ordering for NSEC doesn't account for 8-bit data...

Cheers,

Ben.

-- 
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html       http://www.thebunker.net/

"There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he
doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff