Re: new DNS classes

[Nico Williams <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 08:09:30AM -0700, Paul Vixie wrote:
> Nico Williams wrote:
> >...
> >
> >I'm well aware that as to clients and servers, deploying new RR types is
> >easy.  The hard part is the management backend and UIs.  Not all of them
> >allow you to enter raw RDATA (hex-encoded or whatever).
> >
> >We've struggled with this in KITTEN WG.  Deploying the URI RR type when
> >you're using a hosting service can be anywhere from annoying (must enter
> >raw RDATA) to impossible (the hosting service doesn't give a damn).  I
> >suppose it's just a matter of time; perhaps things have improved since
> >we last looked.
> 
> that would be a prior restraint, and bad for innovation. just like middle
> boxes or the nearly universal assumption that ip means tcp or udp. i know
> this kind of thinking is common. but there is a stark choice for all of us:
> do all of our future protocol work on tcp/80 and make everything fit in
> JSON, so that we can get our work done; or keep doing what the internet used
> to mean, and eventually put enough stress on middle box makers, isp's, and
> in your case dns hosting services, that they have to learn about the
> internet rather than just the web.
> 
> i know which future i'd rather live in. i also feel in-year pressure to get
> my work done. i vacillate as to who gets to receive which burdens.

I'm with you on this.  I badly want to be able to use new RR types
without further ado.  I would prefer to push on the middleboxes and
middlepeople -- but we need to do a better job of this altogether so
that we don't have to wait a decade.  We don't have a spec police, so
all we can do is nag.

Nico
--