Just what *is* a hostname (rfc952/1123, etc)

[Joe Kattner]

2181 is a proposed standard, and 1123 is standard. I would interpert it the
same way you have.

-----Original Message-----
From: Pete Ehlke [mailto:pde at ehlke.net]
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 4:04 PM
To: bind-users at isc.org
Subject: Re: Just what *is* a hostname (rfc952/1123, etc)



On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 12:40:27PM -0800, David Carmean wrote:
> 
> It seems to be perfectly legal to create a domain named "foo_b#r&.com.", 
> if I'm reading RFC2181 correctly; the question is whether the name of 
> any node in the entire subtree below that zone cut can be a legal 
> Internet hostname.
> 
I may be alone in this interpretation, and if so, I hope that Greater
Minds will point out the error of my ways here...

It's my opinion that 2181 simply clarifies the fact that legal DNS names
are a superset of legal Internet hostnames. Microsoft glommed on to 2181
when they designed their DNS strategy for AD to allow for unicode in
RRs, and my opinion is that they're wrong in doing so. AFAICT, the
requirements of 952 and 1123 are still the definition of a legal
hostname.

This of course merely raises the question of whether I'm correct or I'm
on crack, and does nothing to answer *your* question :/

-Pete
-- 
"religious fanatics are not part of my desired user base." 
- djb at cr.yp.to