On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 3:57 PM, Joe Touch <[email protected]> wrote: > My claim is that: > > SRVs represent services as they are currently assigned by IANA > > a new RR could be useful for things that aren't sufficiently > expressible in the IANA service/port registry
Existence proofs show that this is not *actually* so. It's only what RFC2782 was aiming for. Time has passed. That ship has sailed. Someone should update RFC2782 for the benefit of the community, but I don't see how that could be a requirement here. Much less do I think anything could preclude such an update. Nico -- _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
