Re: wildcard NAPTR ( was [sitefinder-tech-discuss] followup from 15oct

[bmanning@karoshi.com]

> 
> bmanning@karoshi.com wrote:
> > 
> > 	in any case... how would folks feel about something like this:
> > 
> > 	com.  in soa (bits'o'rr)
> > 	      in ns  lumpy.
> > 	      in ns  gravy.
> > 	*     in naptr (naptr-bits)
> > 
> > 	whango z tango --- no pesky A rr... :)
> 
> Bill,
> 
> You've said it here and you said it at NANOG, and I bet you are getting 
> blank stares... but the more and more I think of this, the more I 
> believe you are on to something (again, I'm not too swift sometimes).
> 
> With the proper context (i.e. draft-daigle-napstr-02.txt), this might be 
> the long-term solution.  Is this where you were going?
> 
> -andy

	To me, this clearly is the cleaner tactic albeit w/ a steeper
	adoption slope.  Or in a word. - yes-




----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.elistx.com/unsubscribe>