Subject: Re: [radext] #189 (dynamic-discovery): SRV protocol registry

From: "radext issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 11:19:21 -0000

#189: SRV protocol registry

Comment (by [email-masked]):

 This is about the "Proto" field for the SRV RR. I see that the original
 RFC2782 already uses _tcp and _udp in its examples and considers them
 useful, but this has never made its way into an actual registry entry at
 IANA as far as I can see.
 Other (new) protocol tags have been defined properly, e.g.
 https://www.iana.org/assignments/im-srv-labels/im-srv-labels.xhtml#im-srv-
 labels-1
 In the absence of an existing IANA registry specifically for _tcp and
 _udp, I was trying to create one.

 If we can consider those two existing by legacy or via some implicit rule
 (which I still don't "get" after reading your comment), I can also drop
 the paragraph.

 For the sake of releasing -12 before the cutoff, I'll comment out the
 section and we can think plentiful about whether it should rather be in at
 a later point.

-- 
------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
 Reporter:  [email-masked]  |       Owner:  [email-masked]
     Type:  task                    |      Status:  new
 Priority:  minor                   |   Milestone:
Component:  dynamic-discovery       |     Version:
 Severity:  -                       |  Resolution:
 Keywords:                          |
------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/radext/trac/ticket/189#comment:1>
radext <http://tools.ietf.org/radext/>

---

From: "radext issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 11:25:28 -0000

In fact, I didn't want to leave this out completely, so added my reasoning
 in an extra paragraph:

 "This specification makes use of the SRV Protocol identifiers "_tcp"
    and "_udp" which are mentioned as early as [RFC2782] but do not
    appear to be assigned in an actual registry.  Since they are in wide-
    spread use in other protocols, this specification refrains from
    requesting a new registry "RADIUS/TLS SRV Protocol Registry" and
    continues to make use of these tags implicitly."

Ticket URL: <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/radext/trac/ticket/189#comment:2>
radext <http://tools.ietf.org/radext/>