Re: [DNSOP] [art] Another look - draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-05.txt

["John R. Levine" <[e-mail]>]

Catching up:

>>  Assuming we agree that the table also says where to find the registry
>>  for second level names, this removes and need for special cases. The top
>>  level names _tcp _udp _sctp _dccp all work for SRV and URI and take
>>  service names on the second level.
>
> if you view the use of _tcp by more than one rrtype as a coincidence rather 
> than as evidence for the need for a registry, then we can simply define the 
> global registry out of existence (where it has been until now) and ensure 
> that every rrtype's registry of "_" names is public and easily found on the 
> IANA web site.

I don't think it's a coincidence, but as you noted people will do what 
they do.  One registry should make it easier for sensible people to look 
and say aha, _foo already means something for BAR records so I will use a 
different name for unrelated tags for BAZ records.  Or for unsensible 
people, we can at least be aware of what they do.

Regards,
John Levine, [e-mail], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly