Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-forgery-resilience-01.txt

[Andrew Sullivan <andrew@ca.afilias.info>]

On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 06:15:07PM +0100, Shane Kerr wrote:
> 
> Certainly some implementations may have problems with duplicate query IDs, but
> that's out of scope for an RFC, IMHO.

It's not out of scope for consideration in this discussion, though, is
it?  It seems it'd be relevant to whether a good source of randomness
is what should be recommended.  If some implementation has problems
with duplicate query IDs, then they'll be able to argue that
randomness is the wrong target, I think.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew@ca.afilias.info>                              M2P 2A8
jabber: ajsaf@jabber.org                 +1 416 646 3304 x4110

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