In article <6d3c77a3-2326-a4b4-1e99-50fe4647d...@dcrocker.net> you write: >It occurs to me that some folk might not have a perfect memory of a >dnsop working group agreement from Aug, 2017. So here's a tag into it: > > https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsop/current/msg20708.html
I see a message on dnsop from you proposing a bunch of things including "rationalizing" names, and comments from Andrew and Peter saying they like that approach. Maybe I'm odd, but I wouldn't call a change to SRV that retroactively breaks some unknown and probably large number of existing SRV records "rationalizing". I agree that a registry of top level underscore names would be a good idea. I completely disagree with the assertion that we need to make any significant change to the way the second level names are managed. A good way to rationalize them would be to document the the rules in one place with pointers to the relevant registries. R's, John _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
