[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: draft-iab-dns-choices-02.txt comments


On Fri, 10 Jun 2005, Eastlake III Donald-LDE008 wrote:

Am I missing something?

RFC 2929, as well as allocating RR Type numbers from 65280 - 65534 (0xFF00 - 0xFFFE) for private use also allocates almost half of all RR Type numbers, those from 32768 - 65280 (0x8000 - 0xFEFF), for use based on "Specification Required". That is, as defined in RFC 2434:

     Specification Required - Values and their meaning must be
          documented in an RFC or other permanent and readily available
          reference, in sufficient detail so that interoperability
          between independent implementations is possible.

Isn't getting an RR Type based on just publicly documneting its use liberal enough? 

I've not seen any RR types allocated except though IETF consensus and RFC.

Perhaps if RFC2929 is already liberal enough then clarification from
this WG would be good or establishing a better documented procedure for requesting new RR (documented in separate document released preferably
as INFORMATIONAL RFC or BCP) would be good enough and allow those who
are proposing new uses of DNS to get RR type numbers quickly though
IANA that they could test their proposals and experiment with real-life
deployment.

--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william@elan.net

--
to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>