concur with Pauls assertions wrt "long tail".  Picking on specific RR types
to remove is a high maintenance method to put the camel on a diet.
Laudable but maybe not worth the efforts needed to clean up the installed
base.  Perhaps these two ideas might be a better way to simplify things.
1) remove additional section processing for any proposed RR types & then
rework existing rr's that require ASP.   2) dynamically loadable rr's types
(harder in resolvers but so worth the flexablity)

ymmv of course.

/Wm

On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 2:36 PM, Paul Vixie <p...@redbarn.org> wrote:

>
>
> Dick Franks wrote:
>
>>
>> On 26 March 2018 at 16:42, Paul Vixie <p...@redbarn.org
>> <mailto:p...@redbarn.org>> wrote:
>> ...
>>
>> This hypothetical somebody somewhere has already had 30 years warning
>> that these RR's will disappear or be replaced by something better.
>>
>> Deprecation signals end of life, end of support, end of story.
>>
>> To speak of outreach in this particular case is a nonsense; your
>> hypothetical friend has been ignoring the real world for 30 years, and
>> nothing drops into his mailbox these days.
>>
>
> i've had my symbolics 3640 online quite a bit in the last 30 years, and it
> still makes WKS queries, and i have used WKS responses to control it. the
> software still works as well as it was designed to do, but the vendor is
> long out of business. however, read on.
>
> please see down-thread where deprecation turns out to be both undesirable
> for the reasons i've given, and additive to developmental complexity since
> there would be _more_ DNS RFC's to read, and suboptimal compared to
> declaring a core subset of DNS technology as "mandatory to implement" and
> simply leaving WKS (and its hypothetical friends) out of that core subset.
>
>
> --
> P Vixie
>
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Reply via email to