[dnsop] Underscore registration summary

[Bill Fenner <[e-mail]>]

There are two possibly orthogonal issues here:

1. Registration for any _foo that may appear, possibly just
the one closest to the root in a given domain name.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-crocker-dns-attrleaf
Its introduction points out that the semantics of records
underneath the reserved node name may be restricted;
however, this wording may need a bit of work because,
e.g., dnssec may need to put records there no matter
what the semantics defined elsewhere.

2. Registration for service names used in SRV records.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fenner-iana-dns-srv
was my proposal some time ago (summary: update 2782
to use the WKS name registry instead of a vague reference
to 1700 that many have taken to refer to the port number/name
registry, possibly populate the registry, define rules
for new registrations).  This is related to
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lear-iana-no-more-well-known-ports
in that it also says that IANA keeps registrations for
SRV records; presumably whether or not IANA charges for
well known ports is outside the scope of dnsop.


How to move forward?  In a way, it's a question of one registry
or two.  If draft-crocker-dns-attrleaf intends to have all
protocols and services used in SRV records as well as the other
contents, it could serve as both.  However, given the history, I
think SRV records need a little bit different registration rules,
so it may make sense to split them out into a different registry.
The question there would be whether it's just the top-most
prefixed label that gets registered in draft-crocker-dns-attrleaf
or all of them.

  Bill
.
dnsop resources:_____________________________________________________
web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop.html
mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop/index.html