On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Ondřej Surý <ond...@isc.org> wrote:
> No, I don’t mean that. While in theory you can call an aquarium with dead > fish and algae “in use” and tell your neighbors that you have fish and have > a green thumb, it wouldn’t be necessarily an accurate assessment of the > situation. Similarly, an occasional user that tries things doesn’t make > those experimental RRTYPEs to be “in use”. > > What I mean is to make DNS simpler by kicking out stuff that has no use in > existing protocols. > > Ondřej > -- > Ondřej Surý — ISC > > Ok, sorry to sound mean. But I think 'not in use' needs to be defined in the rfc so we all understand it the same. How do we decide when something in no longer in use? Perhaps there is no quantitative measurement and we just have to make a judgement call. "no known practical usage" ? "no known use that will break anything if removed" ? "use is so low that the the advantage of removing exceeds the advantage of continuing to support it" ? "there is very little use and we don't think removing it will cause a problem" ? -- Bob Harold > On 23 Mar 2018, at 14:18, Bob Harold <rharo...@umich.edu> wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 8:11 AM, Ondřej Surý <ond...@isc.org> wrote: > >> Heya, >> >> this is a first attempt to start reducing the load on DNS Implementors >> and actually remove the stuff from DNS that’s not used and not needed >> anymore. >> >> There’s github for the draft: https://github.com/oerd >> nj/draft-sury-dnsop-deprecate-obsolete-resource-records >> >> Ondrej >> -- >> Ondřej Surý >> ond...@isc.org >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> *From: *internet-dra...@ietf.org >> *Subject: **New Version Notification for >> draft-sury-deprecate-obsolete-resource-records-00.txt* >> *Date: *23 March 2018 at 12:09:19 GMT >> *To: *"Ondrej Sury" <ond...@isc.org> >> >> >> A new version of I-D, draft-sury-deprecate-obsolete- >> resource-records-00.txt >> has been successfully submitted by Ondrej Sury and posted to the >> IETF repository. >> >> Name: draft-sury-deprecate-obsolete-resource-records >> Revision: 00 >> Title: Deprecating obsolete DNS Resource Records >> Document date: 2018-03-22 >> Group: Individual Submission >> Pages: 4 >> URL: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-sury- >> deprecate-obsolete-resource-records-00.txt >> Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sury-deprecat >> e-obsolete-resource-records/ >> Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sury-deprecate-obsol >> ete-resource-records-00 >> Htmlized: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-sury-depre >> cate-obsolete-resource-records >> >> >> Abstract: >> This document deprecates Resource Records that are neither being used >> for anything meanigful nor already made obsolete by other RFCs. This >> document updates [RFC1035]. >> >> > I don't mind deprecating unused types. But I don't understand how an > unused type can affect compression. I can only imagine it having an effect > if the type actually exists in a packet, which means that it is 'in use'. > > Do you mean 'types that have DNS records, and hosts query for those > records, but we think they are not really used' ? > > -- > Bob Harold > > >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
