On 2013-05-21, at 15:08, Keith Moore <moore(_at_)network-heretics(_dot_)com>
wrote:
Without responding in detail to John's note, I'll say that I agree
substantially with the notion that the fact that someone manages to get a
protocol name or number registered, should not be any kind of justification
for standardization of a document that describes use of that name or number.
If such a justification was inferred in my document, the problem is presumably
my unclear language because no such justification was intended.
(I am very happy for my document to be re-pointed at informational,
incidentally, for which wheels are in motion. I will likely leave the normative
language in, in the interests of improved interop, and see how far I get.)
Code-points in the RRType registry are assigned by expert review (not simply by
"filling out a template" as someone suggested earlier). If the suggestion is
that the standards track is not available for any work that involves a code
point that was assigned early, then I wonder what process is imagined for any
future DNS work which aims at the standards track.
Joe