Should host/domain names travel over the internet with a trailing dot?

Mon Feb 25 23:36:24 UTC 2013

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Andrews" <marka at isc.org>

> > > No. See RFC 952
> >
> > I think 952 is functionally obsolete, requireing a <24 char name
> > length;
> > I would have expected citations, perhaps, to 1535.
> >
> > Care to expand?
> 
> Ok. RFC 952 as modified by RFC 1123. This covers all legal hostnames
> in use today including those that do not fit in the DNS. The DNS
> supports hostnames up to 253 bytes (255 bytes in wire encoding).
> RFC 1123 allow hostnames to go to 255 bytes. I'm deliberately
> ignoring IDN's as they still need to map back into what is permitted
> by RFC 952 as modified by RFC 1123.

And except on length and first-digit-allowed, 1123 punts naming to 952 
(which doesn't really say) and in 6.1, to 1034 and 1035.  So I know what
my light night reading will be (unless Albitz, Liu, Mockapetris, or any 
of the BIND team are around on the list :-)

> RFC 1535 is NOT a STANDARD. Not all RFC are created equal.

Typo.  1035 (as updated by whatever is on-point, if anything).

And Mark: could you please trim your quoting a bit?

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                  Baylink                       jra at baylink.com
Designer                     The Things I Think                       RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates     http://baylink.pitas.com         2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA               #natog                      +1 727 647 1274