No. It just means that the people spreading FUD have succeeded. RFC 3597 (2003) formalised the handling of unknown RR types and classes. The first draft was written in 2000 and it described treating unknown RR's as opaque data blobs. RFC 2535 (1999) (DNSSEC) depended upon unknown RR types being being treated as opaque blobs. While it didn't explictly ban the use of compression pointers in new types it was known not to use compression in new RR types. RFC 1035 even attempted to get unknown RR's treated as opaque data blobs. Unfortunately the description of where compression could be used was flawed.
maybe I've missed it, but is there a standard way of extending the text format of zone files to recognize new RRs without recompiling the server? and is there a standard way to distribute machine-readable definitions of new RR types?
(of course there are lots of other reasons to look for a replacement for DNS even if the new RR type problem is solved, but that doesn't mean the new RR type problem shouldn't be solved)
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf