Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Want this to be a WG doc?

From: Wes Hardaker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2012 07:40:34 -0700

>>>>> On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 11:17:28 +0200, Edward Lewis <[email-masked]> said:

EL> Any thoughts on whether the following would be a DNSOP document?  I'm
EL> asking DNSEXT too.

My initial reaction, after reading the title, was "yes, it looks like a
good thing".  Then I read the document and realized you were
pseudo-documenting recent allocated types that may or may not exist in
the future and may or may not change in RDATA content before final
publication (if any) in the first place.

Because of all the unknowns in that list, it doesn't seem wise to
formally document a questionable list.  In particular, one of the whole
reasons behind relaxing the RRTYPE allocation system was to allow more
rapid creation of new data types without requiring they be documented
(fully).

So...  I'm leaning toward "no" with a decent chance of being pushed
toward "yes" with even a fairly small logic-I-missed shove.
-- 
Wes Hardaker
SPARTA, Inc.