At 14:42 -0400 6/13/07, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 12:57:17PM -0400, Edward Lewis wrote:Answer A - document them. Answer B - deprecate them.Answer AB: document _and_ deprecate. I'm serious. I know this is work, but I think we should write these down somewhere, and say they're deprecated and needn't be implemented. At least then someone writing a compliant system that gets one of these types in a query knows what it is supposed to be and that it can be ignored. Yes, I am volunteering. Do you have some pointers that I should go read, so that I don't have to start all your forensic work from scratch?
Yeah I do. While thinking more about this, I realized that all we would need to do is list the values and the mnemonics and then say "just don't do it." So I agree on an answer AB.
But there is one possible exception to outright deprecation of all the un-RFC'd types, the ATMA record. All but the ATMA died when their draft expired. The ATM one is defined in a document published external to the IETF. (But I get heartburn over that - the ATM Forum is where the document was originally published. The ATM Forum is no longer amongst the living and even it's web site is gone.)
In talking to IANA on the side I noticed that they had cleaned up a lot of the references (there were a few types in 2005 that were RFC'd, like AAAA, that weren't documented as such and now are) but these remain:
old NSAP-PTR 23
new NSAP-PTR 23 for domain name pointer, NSAP style [RFC1348]
old EID 31 Endpoint Identifier [Patton]
new EID 31 Endpoint Identifier
[http://ana-3.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/nimrod/dns.txt]
old NIMLOC 32 Nimrod Locator [Patton]
new NIMLOC 32 Nimrod Locator
[http://ana-3.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/nimrod/dns.txt]
old ATMA 34 ATM Address [Dobrowski]
new ATMA 34 ATM Address
[http://www.mfaforum.org/ftp/pub/approved-specs/af-saa-0069.000.pdf]
old SINK 40 SINK [Eastlake]
new SINK 40 SINK
[http://bgp.potaroo.net/ietf/all-ids/draft-eastlake-kitchen-sink-02.txt]
The first may be just an editor's choice (see the page for what I
mean), the next two and last are types that were not quite formed.
The ATMA is the one defined elsewhere. All URLs work as of today.
What I haven't considered are RFC'd types that are dead too - because I am not looking at a bureaucratic cleansing, more at "what do we need to leave for new implementors."
-- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Edward Lewis +1-571-434-5468 NeuStar Sarcasm doesn't scale. -- 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/>