-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Patrik Fältström
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 11:43 AM
To: Hector
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: DNS RRTYPEs, the difficulty with
I have not heard anything else than arguments in RFC5507 against
reusing same RRType for many different kind of use.
5507 Design Choices When Expanding the DNS. IAB, P. Faltstrom, Ed., R.
Austein, Ed., P. Koch, Ed.. April 2009. (Format: TXT=44045 bytes)
(Status: INFORMATIONAL)
So, still, no, you should not reuse TXT. You should have your own
RRType. Other choices makes your design very complex.
Yes, many people will still disagree with me, using arguments I do not
agree with...
The conclusion of Section 3.5 of that document doesn't really address the first
bullet in the same section, namely that the user interface by which the new
RRType would get added to a zone often doesn't support doing so. That's turned
out to be a serious problem with, for example, the deployment of the SPF record
(RRType 99).
To accommodate user interface limitations, the RFC that defined SPF (2006)
included use of TXT as a "backup" to enable a period of transition. Collected
evidence shows that a lot of clients do query the type, but fewer than 5% of
participating sites ever publish it even after six years.
In an ideal world I'd also like to see us move in the direction that RFC5507
promotes, but it seems we still aren't there yet.
-MSK
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf