Re: [DNSOP] Registry of non-service _prefix names?

On 11/16/2015 12:39 AM, Ray Bellis wrote: >>From my previous recollection of this, ISTR there was a suggestion that > your draft only directly register "single-label" names, but with "_tcp", > "_udp" et al listed in the registry as a link to RFC 6335? (oops. missed the need to respond to this.)

Re: [DNSOP] Registry of non-service _prefix names?

>>From my previous recollection of this, ISTR there was a suggestion that >your draft only directly register "single-label" names, but with "_tcp", >"_udp" et al listed in the registry as a link to RFC 6335? It seems to me that this needs three columns, like this: NameReference Type

Re: [DNSOP] Registry of non-service _prefix names?

On 14/11/2015 17:07, Dave Crocker wrote: > Done. > > This will be the third or fourth try for the document. Perhaps there is > now enough community interest to make it happen? Thanks Dave :) >From my previous recollection of this, ISTR there was a suggestion that your draft only directly

Re: [DNSOP] Registry of non-service _prefix names?

On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 8:14 PM, John Levine wrote: > >I would sign up as chair if there is enough interest to resurrect this. > > I brought it up, I'm willing to work on it. > Likewise. Also willing to help DISPATCH it via another route if DNSOP doesn't take it up. :-) -MSK

Re: [DNSOP] Registry of non-service _prefix names?

>I think this is OK as an individual and as co-chair. In view of the other discussion we've had, _domainkey doesn't belong in ports and services since it's not something you use as _blah._proto.name in a SRV or NAPTR lookup. > >tim > > >On 11/13/15 3:04 PM, John Levine wrote: >>> why not just

Re: [DNSOP] Registry of non-service _prefix names?

In article <5648026d.9040...@gmail.com> you write: > >Dave > >I would sign up as chair if there is enough interest to resurrect this. I brought it up, I'm willing to work on it. R's, John ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org

Re: [DNSOP] Registry of non-service _prefix names?

I think this is OK as an individual and as co-chair. tim On 11/13/15 3:04 PM, John Levine wrote: why not just go ahead and register the names through http://www.iana.org/form/ports-services? Don't be intimidated by all of the references on the application form If people think that's OK,

Re: [DNSOP] Registry of non-service _prefix names?

Dave I would sign up as chair if there is enough interest to resurrect this. tim On 11/14/15 12:07 PM, Dave Crocker wrote: On 11/13/2015 10:58 PM, Ray Bellis wrote: Dave Crocker previously did some work on an I-D for a (portless) service type registry - I recall he and I discussed it back

Re: [DNSOP] Registry of non-service _prefix names?

On 11/13/2015 10:58 PM, Ray Bellis wrote: > Dave Crocker previously did some work on an I-D for a (portless) service > type registry - I recall he and I discussed it back at the Orlando IETF. > > It would be good to see that resurrected. Done. This will be the third or fourth try for the

Re: [DNSOP] Registry of non-service _prefix names and draft-crocker-dns-attrleaf-07

>Done. > >This will be the third or fourth try for the document. Perhaps there is >now enough community interest to make it happen? The more I look at this, the more of a mess I find. It's not like it would have been all up to you. RFC 6335 came out five years after the first version of your

Re: [DNSOP] Registry of non-service _prefix names?

What you mean is that they believe they do need the prefix regardless of what RRType they will use, including TXT? Yes, the prefix is part of the design. See draft-levine-orgboundary-03 R's, John ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org

Re: [DNSOP] Registry of non-service _prefix names?

Seems there's some hair-splitting here over the definition of the word "service". While RFC 6335 assumes, more than it defines, what a "service" encompasses, it offers the following "functional" definition of the kind of things which need and use "service name"s: Service names are the unique

Re: [DNSOP] Registry of non-service _prefix names?

On 13 Nov 2015, at 19:00, John Levine wrote: > It's not a substitute for a > new RRTYPE; they need the prefix whether the data is TXT or a new type. Clarification, my english is not good enough... What you mean is that they believe they do need the prefix regardless of what RRType they will

Re: [DNSOP] Registry of non-service _prefix names?

>why not just go ahead and register the names through >http://www.iana.org/form/ports-services? Don't be intimidated by all >of the references on the application form If people think that's OK, I'll send in registrations for _domainkey and all. R's, John

Re: [DNSOP] Registry of non-service _prefix names?

On 13/11/2015 18:00, John Levine wrote: Over in the dbound working group we have some proposals that would use yet another underscore prefixed name to avoid name collisions. (It's not a substitute for a new RRTYPE; they need the prefix whether the data is TXT or a new type.) In the mail