Re: [DNSOP] [[e-mail]: New Version Notification for draft-sullivan-dns-class-useless-01.txt]

[Shane Kerr <[e-mail]>]

Mark,

At 2016-03-18 07:33:37 +1100
Mark Andrews <[e-mail]> wrote:

> In message <[e-mail]>, Andrew Sullivan writes:
> > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:06:42AM -0400, Rob Austein wrote:
> >  
> > > off, so we never did implement this in JEEVES or CHIVES.  Symbolics
> > > may have gotten as far as using CH A RRs as one of the many inputs to
> > > their Namespace system, but that was pretty late in their corporate
> > > life cycle, so I doubt many users ever saw it in the wild.  
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 08:03:44AM -0400, Rob Austein wrote:
> >  
> > > other universities did pick up Hesiod, but I'd be astonished if there
> > > were any surviving instances today.  
> >
> > These considerations, however, both again make me think it'd be ok to
> > deprecate classes formally and close the registry.
> >
> > Does anyone want to argue _against_ that direction?  Otherwise, the
> > next version of the draft will propose that.  (It's a much bigger
> > change, I think, and probably requires this WG to process the draft,
> > which is part of the reason I didn't try that before.)  
> 
> There is nothing stopping a second class working.  Absolutely
> nothing.  You just have to want to set up a parallel heirarchy which
> does not have to be complete or maintain a lot more top of namespaces.
> 
> Hesiod worked for those institutions that decided to use it.  They
> maintained their own top of namespace.  They could have use the TXT
> record better but it worked.
> 
> Just because we can't think of a good way to use class today is not
> a good reason to shut down the registry.  It really doesn't cost
> to maintain a registry that is not being actively updated.

Closing the registry sends a clear message: don't use class. That
matches the best understanding today.

If someone thinks of a good way to use class tomorrow, the registry can
be re-opened, right?

Cheers,

--
Shane