On Tue, 18 Aug 2026, John Levine wrote:
According to Dan Mahoney <[email protected]>:
Hello,
I am Requesting the following addition to the "Underscored and Globally
Scoped DNS Node Names" registry, per RFC 8552 Section 3:
RR Type _NODE NAME Reference
TXT _tls RFC 8460
RFC 8460 (SMTP TLS Reporting) defines a TXT record at
_smtp._tls.<domain>. Under RFC 8552, the name that actually needs
registering is the one closest to the root - here, "_tls" - with
"_smtp" as a subordinate name under it. Subordinate names aren't
separately registered; they're the responsibility of whoever holds
the parent entry, so this is not a request to also add "_smtp".
This looks like a oversight from prior work.
It seems to be yes.
It's more of a race condition. RFCs 8460 and 8553 were written at about
the same time and we didn't think to do another pass over newly published
RFCs after the last draft of 8553.
I believe this falls under the "Expert Review" process in RFC 8552
Agreed. IANA has a form for you to submit here:
https://www.iana.org/form/protocol-assignment
This is the process, yes.
At least one of the experts is a regular contributor here so
perhaps they could say whether they need more.
I am the person John is likely eluding to. Frederico is the other DE,
and I've added him to the CC:.
This is a bit of a weird one. Normally, we would be a bit careful with
such generic prefixes and RFC 8460 doesn't actually say anything
about the _tls prefix, only about the _smtp._tls prefix.
Presumably, we would want everyone under _tls to use a protocol/service
prefix but that is not something a FCFS registry can enforce. So I
think it is best to just accept a registration request once it is filed
and perhaps we can find someone who wants to write a short draft that
updates 8460 to clarify how to use the _tls prefix.
Paul
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
