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