Seems there's some hair-splitting here over the definition of the word "service".
While RFC 6335 assumes, more than it defines, what a "service" encompasses, it offers the following "functional" definition of the kind of things which need and use "service name"s: Service names are the unique key in the Service Name and Transport Protocol Port Number registry. This unique symbolic name for a service may also be used for other purposes, such as in DNS SRV records [RFC2782]. Within the registry, this unique key ensures that different services can be unambiguously distinguished, thus preventing name collisions and avoiding confusion about who is the Assignee for a particular entry. Seems like "PGP and S/MIME key publication" would fall under this definition of things-which-need-and-use-service-names, so why not just go ahead and register the names through http://www.iana.org/form/ports-services? Don't be intimidated by all of the references on the application form, to port numbers, since RFC 6335 makes it quite clear that the registry supports "port-less" service names ("Application designers also have the option of requesting only an assigned service name without a corresponding fixed port number if their application does not require one", "This document defines rules for assignment of service names without associated port numbers, for such usages as DNS SRV records [RFC2782], which was not possible under the previous IANA procedures"). If one scrolls to the bottom of http://www.iana.org/assignments/service-names-port-numbers/service-names-port-numbers.xhtml about 800 "port-less" entries will be found. - Kevin -----Original Message----- From: DNSOP [mailto:dnsop-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of John Levine Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 1:01 PM To: dnsop@ietf.org Subject: [DNSOP] Registry of non-service _prefix names? Over in the dbound working group we have some proposals that would use yet another underscore prefixed name to avoid name collisions. (It's not a substitute for a new RRTYPE; they need the prefix whether the data is TXT or a new type.) In the mail world we have _domainkey and _dmarc and likely others. DANE is proposing prefixes for publishing PGP and S/MIME keys. The services registry from RFC 6335 includes all the names for services, but not the prefixes for things that aren't services. How hard would it be either to update 6335 to provide for non-service names, or a new non-service registry with the understanding that it shares the 6335 FCFS namespace? R's, John _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
