On 11. 11. 21 17:56, Joe Abley wrote:
Hi Kim,

I like the idea of cleaning this up.

Choosing nsap.int as an example, I think it would be useful to either update 
RFC 1706 to make it clear that the advice in section 6 of that document no 
longer applies, and that no reverse mapping for NSAP is provided in the DNS. I 
don't think this is a great operational necessity since I imagine the number of 
people who expect this to work is approximately zero but it seems good to be 
tidy.

[I'd suggest reclassifying 1706 to historic but that'd also affect the 
specification for the NSAP RRType; maybe that's a good idea too, but it seems 
outside the scope of what you are trying to achieve, and I don't know how we 
would confirm that it's a good idea.]

Similar comment for other domains where there's similar existing advice.

FTR I can't see any problems with that, and suggest to do that in one go in this document. We have enough RFCs already and wasting more numbers (and work) on simple deprecation does not sound useful to me.

Petr Špaček



Happy to offer actual text if that seems useful.


Joe

On 11 Nov 2021, at 11:38, Kim Davies <kim.dav...@iana.org> wrote:

Colleagues,

I wanted to draw your attention to an Internet Draft we’ve developed,
its goal is to formally deprecate a number of historic “.int”
domains that were designated for Internet infrastructure purposes
decades ago and appear for all intents and purposes obsolete. After some
limited consultation on developing the approach so far, it would be
useful to get some additional eyes on it so we have greater confidence
there is nothing we’ve missed.

Datatracker link: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-davies-int-historic/

It’s a short document, but at its heart we’ve identified the
following domains that are referenced in places but seem to be obsolete:

             atma.int, ip4.int, nsap.int, rdi.int, reg.int, tpc.int

Most of these are not delegated in the int zone any longer, but there
are lingering references to them.

Thanks in advance for any insight, and apologies if you get this message
in duplicate,

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

Reply via email to