Dave Crocker wrote: ....
which I believe is fully clear, given that there does not appear to me to be any candidate for intepreting 'one' other than 'resource record type', but worse, making the change you suggest would produce: DNS data semantics have been limited to the specification of particular resource record types, on the expectation that new resource record types would be added as needed. Unfortunately, the addition of new resource record types has proven extremely challenging, over the life of the DNS, with significant adoption and use barriers.
i can live with that.
which is one heck of a lot of "resource record types" in the same, short paragraph.
truth hurts. -- P Vixie _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
