A-label definition

[JFC Morfin]

At 12:34 24/06/2008, Patrik Fältström wrote:
>On 24 jun 2008, at 05.18, Mark Andrews wrote:
> > If you have a host called 0x7f.0x01.example.com and
> > a search list containg example.com the when someone attempts
> > to telnet to 0x7f.0x01 it won't go to the address in the A
> > record associated with 0x7f.0x01.example.com.
>
>Can not someone write a draft that say "search lists are bad for you"?
>And then turn off the search list features in software....

Dear Patrick,
I am afraid that the market input would more probably be "why search 
lists are good for you". There are plenty of such searchlists to 
remove advertising, support aliases and local TLDs. Anyway the 
dissemination of Unbound under Windows will make the Internet 
multirooted even before this WG is due to publish. This is why I 
suggested to take, and took a more deductive rather than pursuing an 
inductive approach of _staying_ backward compatible. The only 
difference in principle is that our ML-DNS approach is to say: let 
build a solution that _will_be_ backward compatible with non-IDNA and 
IDNA and compatible with the state of the art and its architectural 
consequences.

Tunrning off means billion software updates. If you do that, why not 
to upgrade the software and make it ML-compatible by the same token, 
so you do not have nightmares anymore?