Whoops, apologies, the previous reply was in my Drafts and I hit send on the wrong version. <blush>
I will ask the IANA to update the reference to be RFC4340, and include a link to this thread. W On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 1:27 PM, Warren Kumari <war...@kumari.net> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 7:51 PM, John Levine <jo...@taugh.com> wrote: > >> It appears that Paul Wouters <p...@nohats.ca> said: >> >> Section 4.1.2. says: >> | URI | _dccp | [RFC7566] | >> >> I think this might have been part of a list used to "reserve" the names >> of (transport) protocols, so that constructs like _25._quic.example.com >> could be constructed where the _name denotes the protocol and not the name >> of something. I think dccp got added to this list because it is references >> as a "transport protocol" in RFC4340 and the author wanted to make sure >> transport protocol names were not accidentally squatted by newly invented >> things with a clashing name/acronym. >> >> I think I'm the one who added it and that was definitely the idea. You >> should be able to use SRV or URI with any transport protocol so in view of >> the modest set of transport protocols in use, we might as well reserve >> their names. Dunno where that RFC number came from, though. >> > > > Okey donkey —I think that the best outcome then is to do what Dave > suggested above — "leave the registration but take out the reference.". > > I'd love to be able to ask IANA to make the reference be "Because, well, > we felt like it….", but I'm trying to at least pretend to be a grownup, so > I won't… > > W > > > >> R's, >> John >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
