I'd be satisfied if the requirements draft were to say:
The protocol MUST NOT require use of a new DNS RR type. The protocol MAY
allow for optional use of a new RR type.
And then nobody will use the new (optional) RR type, if there's an alternative.
IMHO, new types of data MUST require new types of RR
If we would re-use RR types, why don't you wan't arbitrary numeric
values on A records (like telephone numers, extensions, system IDs,
etc) ???
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html