On 30 aug 2013, at 21:35, John C Klensin <john-ietf(_at_)jck(_dot_)com> wrote:
The "more prefixes" versus "more RRTYPES" versus subtypes versus
pushing some of these ideas into a different CLASS versus
whatever else one can think of are also very interesting... and
have nothing to do with whether this registry should be created
or what belongs in it.
One of the key messages in RFC 5507 is that one should have a selector of what
RR you want in the triple {owner, type, class} and not as part of the RDATA.
This document is about creating a registry for the selectors that obviously are
needed *IF* one have structured data in the RDATA part of the TXT resource
record type.
Two very different things indeed.
Patrik