No, I don’t mean that. While in theory you can call an aquarium with dead fish and algae “in use” and tell your neighbors that you have fish and have a green thumb, it wouldn’t be necessarily an accurate assessment of the situation. Similarly, an occasional user that tries things doesn’t make those experimental RRTYPEs to be “in use”.
What I mean is to make DNS simpler by kicking out stuff that has no use in existing protocols. Ondřej -- Ondřej Surý — ISC > On 23 Mar 2018, at 14:18, Bob Harold <rharo...@umich.edu> wrote: > > >> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 8:11 AM, Ondřej Surý <ond...@isc.org> wrote: >> Heya, >> >> this is a first attempt to start reducing the load on DNS Implementors and >> actually remove the stuff from DNS that’s not used and not needed anymore. >> >> There’s github for the draft: >> https://github.com/oerdnj/draft-sury-dnsop-deprecate-obsolete-resource-records >> >> Ondrej >> -- >> Ondřej Surý >> ond...@isc.org >> >>> Begin forwarded message: >>> >>> From: internet-dra...@ietf.org >>> Subject: New Version Notification for >>> draft-sury-deprecate-obsolete-resource-records-00.txt >>> Date: 23 March 2018 at 12:09:19 GMT >>> To: "Ondrej Sury" <ond...@isc.org> >>> >>> >>> A new version of I-D, draft-sury-deprecate-obsolete-resource-records-00.txt >>> has been successfully submitted by Ondrej Sury and posted to the >>> IETF repository. >>> >>> Name: draft-sury-deprecate-obsolete-resource-records >>> Revision: 00 >>> Title: Deprecating obsolete DNS Resource Records >>> Document date: 2018-03-22 >>> Group: Individual Submission >>> Pages: 4 >>> URL: >>> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-sury-deprecate-obsolete-resource-records-00.txt >>> Status: >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sury-deprecate-obsolete-resource-records/ >>> Htmlized: >>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sury-deprecate-obsolete-resource-records-00 >>> Htmlized: >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-sury-deprecate-obsolete-resource-records >>> >>> >>> Abstract: >>> This document deprecates Resource Records that are neither being used >>> for anything meanigful nor already made obsolete by other RFCs. This >>> document updates [RFC1035]. > > I don't mind deprecating unused types. But I don't understand how an unused > type can affect compression. I can only imagine it having an effect if the > type actually exists in a packet, which means that it is 'in use'. > > Do you mean 'types that have DNS records, and hosts query for those records, > but we think they are not really used' ? > > -- > Bob Harold >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
