On 10/10/2018 11:52 AM, Adam Roach wrote:
I think this reply covers everything that warranted a specific response
except for the questions in the following three comments, which are
asking specifically about URI RRs:
Drat. Sorry. I'll blame it on limited screen real estate while
traveling, impeding a careful audit...
Comment 1: Was the removal of "web" intentional?
I believe it was not intentional. I've added it to the draft because I
can't think of a downside to its being there...
Comment 2: These initial entries misspell "xmpp" as "xmp"
ack.
Comment 3: Is it envisioned that all future URI entries in this table
will
reference RFC 7533? That doesn't quite seem right. My instinct is that
it would
serve the users of this registry better if:
- _iax refers to RFC 6315
- _acct refers to RFC 7566
- All other enumservice-based URI entries in the current table refer to
RFC 6118
- RFC 7533 is mentioned elsewhere in the document as the reason
enumservices
appear in the table.
Hmmm. I like your last bullet, as a way of choosing between citing
definition of the RR vs definition of the name. Thanks!
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
