Subject: DNS container objects & virtual data types

From: "Anders Rundgren" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 08:08:01 +0100

DNS container objects
=====================
Disregarding the discussion about overloading, misuse etc. I suggest
that DNS RRs objects that does not have defined semantics, which today
spells TXT and later will include XML and BINary as well, should merely
be regarded as "container objects".

Container objects' sole mission is to hold external representations of
objects associated with virtual DNS data types.

DNS virtual data types
======================
A "virtual" DNS data type is a data type that is identified by a unique DNS 
label-set, preferably in the form of a translated URI.  Virtual data types
- Have globally unique names
- Do not rely on a particular registry
- Are equally applicable to private and public data types
- Can be used instantly
- Operate at the same speed as intrinsic DNS data types

[arg,]unique-name[.arg]    container-type   external-representation

Due to the fact that virtual data types are compatible with the existing
DNS infrastructure, there is nothing to "solve" or overcome, except
maybe some mental hurdles.  It seems that three different external
representations should cover most real-world applications.

It is important to note that this scheme is by no means new, it is simply the
de-facto standard in a documented and to some extent refined format.

Anders R

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

---

From: John Levine <[email-masked]>
Date: 22 Jan 2005 17:45:09 -0000

>It is good that you brought up this issue.  If you look what the CSV
>people have done you will note that they in addition to redefining an
>"intrinsic" DNS type (SRV), also have made the "unusual" words
>_client and _service become *reserved*.  I.e. the central registry
>did not prevent these guys from screwing up at all!!!  The IETF has
>no law enforcement arm.

Aw, come on.  If CSV heads down the standards track, we'll arrange to
register the names it uses, or maybe to switch to appropriate names
that are already registered if there are any.  I would have thought it
would be obvious that first you do the experiments, then you register
the names they use if the experiments look promising.  We think CSV is
swell, but nobody's used CSV enough to know if there are horrible
gotchas that we haven't discovered yet.

> A thing that also is much better catered for by virtual types is
> versioning.

I think it's a feature of DNS that versioning is hard.  The more
versions of something that simultaneously exist, the less likely it is
that implementations will interoperate reliably.

R's,
John