[DNSOP] Are SVCB/HTTPSSVC going to be renamed after all?
Alessandro Ghedini <alessandro@ghedini.me> Wed, 10 June 2020 22:59 UTC
Return-Path: <alessandro@ghedini.me>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 916403A1582 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 15:59:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ghedini.me
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N7Qi6Wiwk8-S for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 15:59:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from blastoise.ghedini.me (blastoise.ghedini.me [IPv6:2001:19f0:6c01:a56:5400:1ff:fe4a:5694]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE3D73A1590 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 15:59:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2a02:8010:6241:1:344f:b565:7289:633a]) by blastoise.ghedini.me (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9DC85DF212 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 22:59:42 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ghedini.me; s=mail; t=1591829982; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type; bh=eeMF71fY34l3lAWxWow0KXE79MRCjkX5piJ0r3IbEfE=; b=KwlUEKbYM2DIOtdTm2ofzkSDYckOpn21GgBSbbgjN1hK16IhnG5necB7Y607N/u90nEk1i 8xljGCtL0cE2KVlQBFYW7H/SGCQhGBI25jQY2amnJkB0fx1iBNcQkeQzQkdjQCVdi+dsBh WS0KmD+BBoyTeiB7yP94LNzzsoie7J4=
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 23:59:39 +0100
From: Alessandro Ghedini <alessandro@ghedini.me>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20200610225939.GB44302@sokka.flat11.house>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/K8tkxXqAadC4KKjJLFVX1TJVjFU>
Subject: [DNSOP] Are SVCB/HTTPSSVC going to be renamed after all?
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 22:59:48 -0000
Hello, At the risk of re-opening a can of worms, there was a discussion a while ago on this list on renaming the SVCB and HTTPSSVC records to something else https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/dh_H24_Dq-nr4TkO0FCqySjsnC8/ So I was wondering where that discussion landed (if anywhere) as I can't seem to be able to find any resolution to that on the list. To be clear, I don't particularly care either way, but if a rename is going to happen I'd rather it happens sooner as it will affect implementers, and it might unduly cause people to hold back from merging/deploying code in case a rename actually happens, e.g. https://github.com/miekg/dns/pull/1067#issuecomment-627807069 Cheers
- [DNSOP] Are SVCB/HTTPSSVC going to be renamed aft… Alessandro Ghedini
- Re: [DNSOP] Are SVCB/HTTPSSVC going to be renamed… Erik Nygren
- Re: [DNSOP] Are SVCB/HTTPSSVC going to be renamed… Tim Wicinski
- Re: [DNSOP] Are SVCB/HTTPSSVC going to be renamed… Tommy Pauly