On 3/20/2018 10:16 AM, John R. Levine wrote:
We need to move away from the complexity created by having special
rules for
some entries in the registry.
That would be fine except that the Port and Service registry has
thousands of entries, and the named ones (nearly all of them) are valid
SRV names. Importing a handful of names that we guess are commonly used
with SRV is the worst of both worlds.
Again: the plan is to change the SRV spec so that it doesn't try to
inherit all those values automatically.
Either point at the real registry for SRV, or say that this explicitly
redefines the namespace for SRV and see if dnsop will go for that. I
don't see any way you can just ignore RFC 6335 and its predecessors.
ps. I thought the URI RR had no current actual use (or at least very
little.)
I belive that's correct, but again, either we deprecate URI or we deal
with its naming rules.
Or, here too, we change the URI spec.
d/
--
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
