On 21/03/2018 15:14, John R. Levine wrote:

> The proposal changes the spec for naming SRV records, by replacing the
> existing service name registry with a new, different one, and vastly
> shrinking the list of known names.  To me, that is nuts.  It will
> retroactively make an unknown set of existing SRV records non-standard.

I'm with John on this one.

I recall discussing attrlea fwith Dave way back at the Orlando IETF.

I argued then that we need a top level registry for the likes of _tcp,
_udp, _dmarc, etc, but I see absolutely no need for a new shrunken
registry to replace the port and services registry already used for SRV.

By all means define a second level registry for those two-level
underscore labels that aren't used for SRV, though.

Ray

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Reply via email to