Message for Bind-users

[Barry Margolin]

In article <3946C7F5.5DFFB36E at daimlerchrysler.com>,
Kevin Darcy  <kcd at daimlerchrysler.com> wrote:
>And that's where the analogy breaks down, as all analogies ultimately do.
>It takes a lot of effort -- *physical* effort -- to widen a tunnel, but
>just a few code tweaks to start accepting underscores.

A few code tweaks multiplied by all the different pieces of code that might
need to be tweaked, multiplied by all the sites that will need to upgrade.
Pretty soon it starts to add up.

For Y2K this type of work was necessary, since we couldn't avoid the date
change.  But for something as inconsequential as the underscore character,
why bother?

There are some RFC's or I-D's regarding internationalization of DNS
character sets.  As part of this, a relaxation of the underscore rule would
certainly make sense.  But not just for underscore by itself.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar at genuity.net
Genuity, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.