Re: [kitten] Adoption of draft-mccallum-kitten-krb-service-discovery?

[Petr Spacek <[e-mail]>]

On 1.6.2016 12:46, Petr Spacek wrote:
> On 20.5.2016 17:06, Nico Williams wrote:
>> > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 09:26:42AM +0200, Petr Spacek wrote:
>>> >> On 19.5.2016 18:47, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
>>>> >>> On Thu, 2016-05-19 at 11:25 -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
>>>>> >>>>  - Perhaps we should have our own RR type.  In principle it's easy to
>>>>> >>>>    add them, but:
>>> >>
>>> >> Any new RR type will be in worse position than URI because of reasons you
>>> >> stated below.
>> > 
>> > Exactly.
> For the record, opinions of DNS gurus from dnsop list can be found in dnsop
> archives:
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsop/current/msg17526.html
> 
> Message
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsop/current/msg17527.html
> indicates that it might be possible to standardize TXT if you try it.
> 
> Message
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsop/current/msg17534.html
> argues that URI is good enough and that TXT is a bad practice.
> 
> Pick an answer which suits you the best :-)

BTW the discussion continues on krbdev mailing list and wiki, for some reason
people there gave up on kitten...

http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/krbdev/2016-June/012605.html

-- 
Petr Spacek  @  Red Hat