On 24 March 2018 at 09:48, Joe Abley <jab...@hopcount.ca> wrote: > But I think brushing the grains RRType parsing dust off the > camel is not going to do much for its posture. > > +1
Speaking from experience, having spent a few dozen hours so far on some client code, the code necessary to implement an additional RRType is trivial by comparison to literally anything else in the protocol, including such (supposedly) trivial operations as reading and writing zone files. I've got nothing against deprecating RRTypes that we know aren't in use, but it doesn't seem like a particularly high priority.
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
