On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 02:09:14PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> That’s one of the goals of the document - saying: “it’s ok to not
> implement those RR Types, and it’s ok to break if you receive them"

We need to state clearly what is meant by "ok to break".

I described my preferred approach as an implementer upthread. Let me
state it again more formally and let people knock it down:

0. types will be flagged as obsolete/deprecated in the IANA registry,
   and the following guidance is given to DNS implementors in the handling
   of obsolete/deprecated RR types:

1. auth servers SHOULD log a warning when loading zones that contain
   obsolete/deprecated rrtypes.

2. responders SHOULD NOT compress rdata when rendering obsolete/deprecated
   type records to wire format.

3. queriers which receive obsolete/deprecated type records MAY interpret
   them as unknown type records (rfc 3597), and MUST NOT interfere with
   their transmission.

   3a. note that the choice to parse obsolete/deprecated MAY be contingent
       on whether the rdata is compressed: an obsolete type record MAY be
       parsed as a known type if its rdata is uncompressed, but as an
       unknown type otherwise.

4. validators and signers SHOULD treat rdata for obsolete/deprecated types
   as opaque with respect to canonical RR ordering and deduplication

-- 
Evan Hunt -- e...@isc.org
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Reply via email to