Re: [art] draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf

[Dave Crocker <[e-mail]>]

On 8/2/2017 5:35 PM, John Levine wrote:
> In article <[e-mail]> you write:
>>     2. Create a separate document that specifies modifications to the
>> SRV and URI documents, rationalizing the use of underscore names,
>> through the mechanism defined in -attrleaf-.
> 
> It seems a bit late to change SRV.  Or would you only adjust the
> documentation to match observed reality?

The latter.  The change is to the registration process, not to SRV, per 
se.  That is, take a snapshot of the existing SRV underscore usage and 
re-specify it in terms of an underscore registry, rather than in terms 
of an inheritance from another registry.


> For URI, it points at other RFCs to get the protocol/service and
> enumservice names.  Are you proposing to change URI to add an
> extra level of name, or do you want to reach through and change
> the enumservice RFCs too?

Same approach as for SRV.  Shift to use the underscore registry.  My 
understanding is that URI has little adoption, so even if the result is 
some usage changes, that might not be intolerable.

d/


-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net