Re: [DNSOP] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-sury-deprecate-obsolete-resource-records-00.txt

[Bob Harold <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 1:03 PM, Ondřej Surý <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Thanks, now I understand what you are asking for;), so what about:
>
> “No existing Internet Standard uses these Resource Records and there no
> know practical usage in the public Internet.”
>
> Ondřej
> --
> Ondřej Surý — ISC
>
>
Works for me, thanks!

-- 
Bob Harold



> On 23 Mar 2018, at 16:51, Bob Harold <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Ondřej Surý <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> No, I don’t mean that. While in theory you can call an aquarium with dead
>> fish and algae “in use” and tell your neighbors that you have fish and have
>> a green thumb, it wouldn’t be necessarily an accurate assessment of the
>> situation. Similarly, an occasional user that tries things doesn’t make
>> those experimental RRTYPEs to be “in use”.
>>
>> What I mean is to make DNS simpler by kicking out stuff that has no use
>> in existing protocols.
>>
>> Ondřej
>> --
>> Ondřej Surý — ISC
>>
>>
> Ok, sorry to sound mean.  But I think 'not in use' needs to be defined in
> the rfc so we all understand it the same.  How do we decide when something
> in no longer in use?  Perhaps there is no quantitative measurement and we
> just have to make a judgement call.
>
> "no known practical usage" ?
> "no known use that will break anything if removed" ?
> "use is so low that the the advantage of removing exceeds the advantage of
> continuing to support it" ?
> "there is very little use and we don't think removing it will cause a
> problem" ?
>
> --
> Bob Harold
>
>
>
>> On 23 Mar 2018, at 14:18, Bob Harold <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 8:11 AM, Ondřej Surý <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>> Heya,
>>>
>>> this is a first attempt to start reducing the load on DNS Implementors
>>> and actually remove the stuff from DNS that’s not used and not needed
>>> anymore.
>>>
>>> There’s github for the draft: https://github.com/oerd
>>> nj/draft-sury-dnsop-deprecate-obsolete-resource-records
>>>
>>> Ondrej
>>> --
>>> Ondřej Surý
>>> [e-mail]
>>>
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>
>>> *From: *[e-mail]
>>> *Subject: **New Version Notification for
>>> draft-sury-deprecate-obsolete-resource-records-00.txt*
>>> *Date: *23 March 2018 at 12:09:19 GMT
>>> *To: *"Ondrej Sury" <[e-mail]>
>>>
>>>
>>> A new version of I-D, draft-sury-deprecate-obsolete-
>>> resource-records-00.txt
>>> has been successfully submitted by Ondrej Sury and posted to the
>>> IETF repository.
>>>
>>> Name: draft-sury-deprecate-obsolete-resource-records
>>> Revision: 00
>>> Title: Deprecating obsolete DNS Resource Records
>>> Document date: 2018-03-22
>>> Group: Individual Submission
>>> Pages: 4
>>> URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-sury-d
>>> eprecate-obsolete-resource-records-00.txt
>>> Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sury-deprecat
>>> e-obsolete-resource-records/
>>> Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sury-deprecate-obsol
>>> ete-resource-records-00
>>> Htmlized:       https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-sury-depre
>>> cate-obsolete-resource-records
>>>
>>>
>>> Abstract:
>>>   This document deprecates Resource Records that are neither being used
>>>   for anything meanigful nor already made obsolete by other RFCs.  This
>>>   document updates [RFC1035].
>>>
>>>
>> I don't mind deprecating unused types.  But I don't understand how an
>> unused type can affect compression.  I can only imagine it having an effect
>> if the type actually exists in a packet, which means that it is 'in use'.
>>
>> Do you mean 'types that have DNS records, and hosts query for those
>> records, but we think they are not really used'  ?
>>
>> --
>> Bob Harold
>>
>>
>>
>