On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 12:47:10PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: > It's occured to me that it might be useful to pre-allocate some new > types without a current use assigned (e.g. TXT1, TXT2, TXT3) so that > there's time for them to be integrated into tools before they are > needed. How could you integrate a pre-allocated type when you don't know what its format is? If you knew how to do that, you could just deal with unknown RRTPYEs, and then having TYPE99 wouldn't be a problem anyway. > protocol to get deployment it needs the new type assigned. For a > new type to get assigned, there needs to be some indication it will > get deployed. Absolutely false. RRTYPE assignment is by expert review, and the last reviews, while late and a little careless about process, were not in any way held up by the possibility (or lack thereof) of use. Nobody is reluctant to assign RRTPYEs. We have lots of numbers. There may have been problems with this in the past, but not at least since I've been DNSEXT WG co-chair, which is several years now. > type there's no incentive to migrate. The only way to break this > cycle is to have something readily available for initial use with > protocol experimentation. There's lots of room for that, too. The range 65280-65534 is for private use. You can do whatever you like there. A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf