On 03/Mar/12 00:13, John R. Levine wrote: > >> Until provisoning systems accept UNKNOWN record types they will >> always be a bottle neck. Without that you will have to wait for >> the change request to be processed. Given the history just getting >> AAAA records added to most of these system it will be forever. > > AAAA was unusually painful, since it requires adding a parser for IPv6 > addresses. (Having hacked it into my provisioning system, I speak > from experience.) Most new RR types are just strings, numbers, names, > and the occasional bit field. Yeah, and if ISPs already had troubles with ho-de-ho-de-ho-de-ho, how will they join in on skee-bop-de-google-eet-skee-bop-de-goat? Given that, designers of new RR types will want to stick to string formats just to spare ISPs some parsing, at the cost of losing a half of the advantages that RFC 5507 talks about, along with syntactic validations aimed at preventing some permerror/permfail cases. _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf