> On 13 Nov 2018, at 5:03 pm, Paul Wouters <p...@nohats.ca> wrote: > > On Mon, 12 Nov 2018, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > >> we would like to ask the working group to adopt the following I-D as a >> WG item: >> >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lhotka-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang-00 > > I'll leave that call up to the chairs bit it sounds like a good idea. > > I have reviewed the document. > > First, the yand model is correct in the draft. But unfortunately, the IANA > registry > itself has flaws. > > I am also confused by the difference between deprecated and obsoleted. I > guess the > yang model interprets the IANA regitry, but the registry has no official > column > designation for this. I wonder if it should be given one. I also then suggest > that > the terms obsoleted and deprecated be merged into one term. > > I see some RRTYPES are listed as EXPERIMENTAL in the IANA registry while > these are > really OBSOLETED. I wonder if we can do a quick draft that moves those to > HISTORIC, > so this yang model can use the proper "obsoleted" entry for these. I am > referring to: > > MB 7 a mailbox domain name (EXPERIMENTAL) [RFC1035] MG 8 > a mail group member (EXPERIMENTAL) [RFC1035] MR 9 a mail rename > domain name (EXPERIMENTAL) [RFC1035] > > RP 17 for Responsible Person > > X25 19 for X.25 PSDN address > > ISDN 20 for ISDN address [RFC1183] RT 21 for Route > Through [RFC1183] NSAP 22 for NSAP address, NSAP style A record > [RFC1706] NSAP-PTR 23 for domain name pointer, NSAP style > > PX 26 X.400 mail mapping information [RFC2163] GPOS 27 > Geographical Position [RFC1712] > > KX 36 Key Exchanger [RFC2230] > > A6 38 A6 (OBSOLETE - use AAAA) > > DLV 32769 DNSSEC Lookaside Validation
DLV isn’t obsolete. The registry ISC published is gone but anyone can publish their own registry. > The following entries are deprecated or obsoleted by an RFC, but not marked > as such in the IANA > registry: > > AFSDB 18 for AFS Data Base location [RFC1183][RFC5864] > SIG 24 for security signature > [RFC4034][RFC3755][RFC2535][RFC2536][RFC2537][RFC2931][RFC3110][RFC3008] KEY > 25 for security key > [RFC4034][RFC3755][RFC2535][RFC2536][RFC2537][RFC2539][RFC3008][RFC3110] SIG is NOT OBSOLETE. It is used for SIG(0). It’s use *for DNSSEC* is obsolete. KEY is NOT OBSOLETE. It is used for SIG(0). It’s use *for DNSSEC* is obsolete. > NXT 30 Next Domain (OBSOLETE) > > > (Odd how NXT is marked obsolete but not SIG or KEY. These are a set and > should be treated the same) > > (I'm skipping NULL, MINFO/HINFO on purpose to due Olafur :) > > > > > NITS: > > It seems that the IANA address in Section 3 implies Canada (CA) or more > likely suffers > from the assumption that no country specified means "United States". Please > specify > the country :) > > Paul > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
