Subject: Re: [dnsext] Small proposed change to draft-registry-fixes

From: Scott Rose <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 07:22:35 -0400

I'd say a firm "Probably never".

So "Reserved" will work for the foreseeable future of DNSSEC.

Scott

On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Edward Lewis <[email-masked]> wrote:

> At 13:18 -0400 5/31/11, Scott Rose wrote:
>
>  Or should it simply be "Reserved" and leave it at that?
>>
>
> How soon are we going to run out of numbers?
>
> (It's not like we haven't been sloppy before.  See RR type code
> 3,4,7,8,10,...,40, or my favorites 32 [double useless] and 33 [half
> useless].)
>
> --
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Edward Lewis
> NeuStar                    You can leave a voice message at
> +1-571-434-5468
>
> Now, don't say I'm always complaining.
> Wait, that's a complaint, isn't it?
>
_______________________________________________
dnsext mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext