Re: IANA type code registration clean up

[Edward Lewis <Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz>]

At 11:43 -0700 6/13/07, Douglas Otis wrote:

> Would this require a draft listing these items to assist IANA in making the
> changes?

More so than getting changes in IANA is the document saying that the 
types have no definition with respect to the names registered.  It's 
not that these are unknown type codes - they have names.  We should 
say that the type code, say, 32, isn't to be assumed to be NIMROD 
anymore.  It could be, it might be, just don't count on it and don't 
sweat implementing it.

What I want to defend against here is that some business contract 
says "implement a full DNS server" and the poor coders can't find the 
RDATA format for NIMROD.  Neither the IETF nor IANA require/enforce 
compliance, it is in the hands of the contracts we run under.

I see this has a potentially multi-step process.

1) Note that the types are meaningless and discourage anyone from *requiring*
their implementation.

2) Request IANA revert the values to undefined and tell folks to rip 
the implementations of these types from their future releases and 
instead treat them as unknown types when seen on the wire.

3) Reusing the type values and tell folks to to add code to future 
releases to handle the type a certain way.

I don't think we want to do step 2 now, much less step 3.  I'm 
stating them just to give the contrast of what step 1 is.  The 
document I have in mind ought not rule out anyone from using the 
types as they might already be doing, the document is strictly there 
to warn against requiring any implementation to do the types.
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
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/>