On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 9:56 AM, David Conrad <drc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
John,
We have been told on numerous occasions that one of the primary reasons for continued use of TXT is because middleboxes, etc., do not allow new RR types (something deprecation of the SPF RR would seem to only encourage). The number of bits in the type field would not seem to be particularly relevant to this.
> Either that or figure out how to make it easy enough to deploy new
> RRTYPEs that people are willing to do so.
>
> The type number is 16 bits, after all. We're not in any danger of running out.
Regards,
-drc
Which is a problem that I think can only be solved if there is a general solution of the policy distribution problem and an expectation that at least new middle boxen will support it.
I have been pushing for some sort of 'Internet 2.0' branding for equipment that meets a comprehensive set of nextgen needs, i.e. IPv6, port forwarding, DNSSEC, border policy enforcement for that very reason.
But it has to be a two way street. The reason DNS Choices fell flat is that it just told people what not to do to solve their problems, it did not provide a proposal that actually solved their problems.
Website: http://hallambaker.com/