What’s so wrong of using TYPExxx for these if you absolutely need them to run the ancient technology while at the same time running the latest version of BIND (or your favorite DNS server)?
Your argument feels like strawman to me. And I am not the one sitting on a pile of passive DNS data, so I can’t pull the numbers... We are not taking the ability to put random TYPEnnn records into the zone, we are just saying the tools just won’t understand them anymore. Again nothing is going to break on the day one. Ondrej -- Ondřej Surý — ISC > On 23 Mar 2018, at 18:26, Paul Vixie <p...@redbarn.org> wrote: > > > > Ondřej Surý wrote: >> I strongly disagree. The DNS protocol deserve cleanup. Deprecating >> RRTYPEs doesn’t mean the will stop working on the day the RFC is >> published, neither are people going to backport the removal of >> RRTYPEs to existing DNS software releases. >> >> It just means - whatever ancient stuff you are using - you are on >> your own now. It’s same as with the stuff that never got the RFC. > > so anyone supporting an older internal network using modern tools has to stop > upgrading their tooling. that's not constructive for anybody. all of us will > be less safe if these tools become non-upgradeable. > >> Paul, sorry, but the argument “but I know of people running” ancient >> systems can’t be used at every attempt to cleanup the kitchensink >> protocol that DNS is right now. > > ondrej, if you're looking for stuff to kill that nobody is using and that > needlessly fattens the camel, there's a lot of lower hanging fruit. > > to say it's complicated, let's simplify it, and oh by the way we need to add > a CNAME to support the never-workable RFC 5011 plan we adopted in ignorance > many years back, in the same breath, confuses me. > > -- > P Vixie > _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
