Re: [DNSOP] Self-describing RTYPE in the DNS, draft-levine-dnsextlang (was DNS-in-JSON draft)

[Tony Finch <[e-mail]>]

John R Levine <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> I'm close to that.  If a field is odd but it's a minor variant of something
> else, such as the hex fields with optional hyphens or dots, it's easy enough
> to include.  Or if it seems like it might be useful in the future, like a
> trailing list of domain names which could show up in something like CLONE,
> might as well.

Yep.

> Beyond that, I don't think anyone will ever reuse the odd arithmetic in LOC or
> the data-dependent formats in IPSECKEY, so if I do anything for them, it'll be
> something like Z[LOC] or Z[IPSECKEY] meaning do the appropriate special
> hackery for that record type.

Yep. My model was to treat special cases like these as a single field
which just happens to have a particularly complicated implementation -
multiple subfields etc.

> Not sure what to do with the type bit maps in NSEC.  They're reused in
> NSEC3, and both records are certainly in active use.

It's worth treating widely used and re-used RDATA fields as reusable
field types :-)

I'll have a look at your latest draft.

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  <[e-mail]>  http://dotat.at/  -  I xn--zr8h punycode
Humber, Thames, Dover, Wight: Variable 3 or 4. Smooth or slight. Fog patches.
Moderate, occasionally very poor.