> On 8 Apr 2026, at 11:40, Petr Špaček <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 07. 04. 26 11:29, Roy Arends wrote: >>> On 6 Apr 2026, at 19:40, Wessels, Duane >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Dear DNSOP, >>> >>> As you may already know, the DELEG working group is embarking on requesting >>> early allocation of code points for the DELEG protocol. >>> draft-ietf-dnsop-delext also comes into play here because that draft >>> describes a new subcategory of RR types called Delegation Types. The DELEG >>> RR type will be allocated from this new range. >>> >>> The area directors for DELEG and DNSOP want to make sure that >>> draft-ietf-dnsop-delext is stable before proceeding with the early >>> allocation request to IANA. This is an important step in the process for >>> any early allocation request. Accordingly, Brian and I are here to ask >>> DNSOP and its chairs to make an assessment on the status and stability of >>> draft-ietf-dnsop-delext so that we can proceed. >> Thanks for this. >> I would like to clarify that the methodology and protocol elements are >> intended to be an exact match with draft-ietf-deleg. Any discrepancies will >> be addressed by the authors of draft-ietf-dnsop-delext to ensure alignment. >> The sole purpose of draft-ietf-dnsop-delext is to define and allocate a >> range of RR types, one of which will be assigned to the DELEG RR. >> One point to note is that we should avoid having two documents defining the >> same protocol elements in the long term. Guidance would be appreciated on >> how best to converge these into a single document, or alternatively, to >> clearly separate responsibilities. For instance, one document defining the >> protocol elements and another specifying the DELEG/DELEGPARAM RR types and >> their RDATA. > > Cleanest option would be to specify range in DELEG. Assuming we are still not > allowed to do that, I would just specify protocol in DELEG protocol and > minimize draft-ietf-dnsop-delext to just say something like 'behavior > applicable to DELEG RRtype is now extended to range ...'.
That was the plan, but was informed that draft-ietf-dnsop-delext needed to be able to stand on its own in DNSOP and have no dependencies, so it can be swiftly dealt with. Warmly, Roy
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
