Re: [DNSOP] Fw: New Version Notification for draft-yao-dnsop-accompanying-questions-00.txt

["Jiankang Yao" <[e-mail]>]

From: Paul Wouters
Date: 2016-05-03 23:36
To: Ray Bellis
CC: yaojk; dnsop
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Fw: New Version Notification for draft-yao-dnsop-accompanying-questions-00.txt

>It would be nice if you do a qtype=mx lookup that you could get the
>related records. 
>

this is one possible solution.

but you have to design different rfcs for different similar use cases.
for examples:
for dmarc, you need to design one
for tlsa or ipseckey, you design another one.

in future, when similar use cases appear again, you have to produce another another rfc.
for example, https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-uta-smtp-tlsrpt-00 
UTA is also a possible customer for draft-yao-dnsop-accompanying-questions-00.txt  


>Whether it is dmarc or tlsa or ipseckey. But what
>happened is that we moved those type of records to a different location
>from the qname. So that made this proposed feature a lot less
>interesting.
>

our current suggested solution's benefit is that 

draft-yao-dnsop-accompanying-questions-00.txt  can work for most current use cases mentioned such as dmarc, tlsa or ipseckey.

it will also work for future use cases https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-uta-smtp-tlsrpt-00.

If there is a solution which can kill two birds with one stone, why refuse to use it?


Best Regards

Jiankang Yao