On Tue, Mar 07, 2023 at 11:15:55AM +0100, Peter Thomassen wrote: > Oops, touché! I stand corrected. Thanks, Mark. > > What I meant is rrtype 0. I used the wrong mnemonic.*
IMHO, you're almost definitely correct that NULL (type 10) would be safe to use for this. Type 0, thought, would not - it's used internally by name servers in ways that could be pretty difficult to untangle. I would lean toward using a newly allocated type code, though, because I'm 100% sure that wouldn't cause any conflict with existing implementations, and I'm only 99.7% sure that NULL wouldn't. -- Evan Hunt -- e...@isc.org Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
