Subject: Re: concerning draft-josefsson-dns-url-08.txt

From: Simon Josefsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 19:17:24 +0200

Zefram <[email-masked]> wrote a few months ago:

> I was referring to RFC2673 bit labels.  Consider also what should be
> done for other EDNS0 extended label types (RFC2671).

After doing some research, I discovered that IESG has reclassified
binary labels from proposed standard to experimental, refer to
<http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf-announce/Current/msg19416.html>.
So I came to the conclusion that they are not worth spending more time
on, and added the following under "Interoperability considerations":

   Interaction with Binary Labels [12], or other extended label types,
   has not been analyzed. However, they appear to be infrequently used
   in practice.

I hope this is satisfactory.  If someone wants to use binary labels in
DNS URIs, and have some ideas on how to do it, please let me know.

I intend to submit the following document as -09 soon.  If someone has
additional comments, now would be a good opportunity to send them.
Note that it does not remove the optional "//"dnsauthority"/", as I
and others believe it is useful, and there were only one voice that
wanted to remove it.  With that possible exception, and with this
message to solve the binary label problem, I believe I have addressed
all concerns raised in this thread.

http://josefsson.org/draft-josefsson-dns-url.txt

Thanks for the feedback,
Simon