>> The other which I prefer is simply to put the four _proto tags into >> the new underscore registry. Add a note that they have subnames from >> the RFC 6335 services registry, and for anew new protocol tags try to to >> keep the protocol names consistent with the keywords in the protocol >> number registry. > >This, exactly. > >I'd suggest that perhaps the keywords from the protocol registry (or a >canonical representation thereof, for those that don't match LDH) should >actually be reserved ?
If you take a look at that registry, it's a stroll down memory lane. You'll find NVP-II from RFC 741 in 1977, PUP and XNS-IDP from Xerox in 1980, and other great hits from networking history. I really doubt that people are going to ever publish _pup SRV records other than perhaps on April 1. R's, John _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
