Subject: [dnsext] RRTYPE request for NINFO

From: Ted Hardie <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 09:52:18 -0800

In some off-line discussions with Jim, I noted that I do believe
that the primary purpose of registration in this space is to avoid
code point collision.  Based on that criterion, the request for NINFO
should probably go forward; it is clear that .tel plans to deploy this
RRType and allocating a code point to distinguish their use from
what would happen with a simple grab has value for the community.

I have asked Jim to consider some changes to his registration
which would, I believe, help establish at least the charset of the
text and potentially the media type of the NINFO (e.g. distinguishing
html-formatted text from plain text).  Those changes would, in my
opinion, make this more useful to a broader range of folks, but they
don't change the value of avoiding collision.

			regards,
				Ted Hardie

--
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: Alex Bligh <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 21:06:30 +0000

--On 2 December 2008 09:52:18 -0800 Ted Hardie <[email-masked]> wrote:

> code point collision.

Without prejudice to the particular application in question, would
it make sense to have a means of assigning private RRTYPEs
even if we limited the RRTYPEs to ones whose records "looked just
like TXT RRs"?

Alex

---

From: Samuel Weiler <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 02:07:57 -0500 (EST)

[ Moderators note: Post was moderated, either because it was posted by
   a non-subscriber, or because it was over 20K.  
   With the massive amount of spam, it is easy to miss and therefore 
   delete relevant posts by non-subscribers. 
   Please fix your subscription addresses. ]

This request fully satisfies the criteria we agreed on in (the shiny 
new) RFC5395 section 3.1.2 and, accordingly, should be granted.

That said, using unstructured text is ill-advised, and I hope Jim 
resubmits the request, adding meta-data for character set at the very 
least.

I also encourage not using "zone" in the name or mnemonic of the RR -- 
it appears that this RR is more tied to domains than zones, and it 
would be better to avoid the confusion.

-- Sam