>This starts a Call for Adoption for "DNS Scoped Data Through >'_Underscore' Attribute Leaves" > >The draft is available here: >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-crocker-dns-attrleaf/ >Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption >by DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view. > >Please also indicate if you are willing to contribute text, review, etc.
This registry is long overdue (the -00 was written almost a decade ago) but better late than never. The draft is in OK shape but needs some careful work to clarify how it relates to the service name and number registry set up by RFC 6335. Service names are, as far as I can tell, used extensively in the DNS, but only as sub-names of protocol names for SRV, NAPRI, and URI records, e.g., "sip" in: _sip._udp IN SRV 0 5060 host42 The service names in the current draft should come out, and it needs language pointing to the service name registry for names used as subnames of protocol names. There is no registry of protocol names, and although it may be somewhat painful to set one up at this late date, I think it would be a good idea. The names _tcp _udp _sctp are used as protocol names in RFCs, maybe others. IANA has a Protocol Numbers registry and it's not clear to me whether we should add an optional name column to that registry (optional because most of the protocols are dead and most of the rest are not intended to carry multiple services) or a separate registry of names of live protocols that are suitable for multiple services. None of this should be terribly hard. I've discussed it with Dave and believe that he generally agrees with the direction. I'm happy to rewrite, review, whatever. R's, John PS: Speaking of rewriting, in the last paragraph of section 3, it should say "right" where it says "left". _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
