home.social

#rfc9432 — Public Fediverse posts

Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #rfc9432, aggregated by home.social.

  1. Guillaume-Jean Herbiet @[email protected] ·

    @shaft OK. So I believe it is legitimate to consider TXT multi-strings concatenation makes sense for SPF records in #rfc7208 and “tokenization” is more appropriate for catalog zones in #rfc9432.

    #rfc7208 #rfc9432
  2. Guillaume-Jean Herbiet @[email protected] ·

    @shaft OK. So I believe it is legitimate to consider TXT multi-strings concatenation makes sense for SPF records in #rfc7208 and “tokenization” is more appropriate for catalog zones in #rfc9432.

    #rfc7208 #rfc9432
  3. Guillaume-Jean Herbiet @[email protected] ·

    #dns question about multi-string TXT records: #rfc7208 section 3.3 says they shall be concatenated w/o space.
    Is this applicable only to #spf records?
    Looking at #rfc9432 (catalog zones) section 4.3.2.1 the group example "operator-y" "bar" seem to suggest this shall be interpreted as some sort of key/value (e.g. “operator-y=bar” or “operator-y bar”) where “operator-ybar” would not make any sense.
    Neither #rcf1035 nor #rfc1464 mention multi-string TXT records.

    #dns #rfc7208 #spf #rfc9432 #rcf1035 #rfc1464
  4. Guillaume-Jean Herbiet @[email protected] ·

    #dns question about multi-string TXT records: #rfc7208 section 3.3 says they shall be concatenated w/o space.
    Is this applicable only to #spf records?
    Looking at #rfc9432 (catalog zones) section 4.3.2.1 the group example "operator-y" "bar" seem to suggest this shall be interpreted as some sort of key/value (e.g. “operator-y=bar” or “operator-y bar”) where “operator-ybar” would not make any sense.
    Neither #rcf1035 nor #rfc1464 mention multi-string TXT records.

    #dns #rfc7208 #spf #rfc9432 #rcf1035 #rfc1464