Re: [DNSOP] [apps-discuss] Draft of interest in DNSOP: draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf

[Dave Crocker <[e-mail]>]

On 8/4/2016 1:54 AM, Ray Bellis wrote:
> The one I thought was a deviation was "xmpp-client" (5222), but it turns
> out that's just because my macOS /etc/services file is out of date and
> still lists that as "jabber-client".

Thanks for the clarification, Ray.

Absent anyone else raising concerns, I'll change the draft to remove any 
normative specification of second-level underscore names, and add some 
informative (non-normative) language pointing to the spiffy new(ish) and 
improved IANA table.


That leaves what I think is still a significant open question:

>> For URI records RFC 7553 says they're either named the same as SRV
>> records, or they use enumservice names from the Enumservice
>
> Declaring a namespace as the union of two, independently-maintained
> registries is a very efficient way to encourage -- actually in
> theoretical terms, it guarantees -- collisions.
>

I see this as a fundamental problem with the URI spec, for the reason 
cited.  I also think the current spec should be careful not to promote 
that problem.

Suggestions?

d/
-- 
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net