|
Deborah, I support the approach of using a Route
Object. DNS is not the only protocol that is used today to access
interconnect routing information and DNS/ENUM may not survive as the long term
query-response protocol for accessing interconnect routing data. The one
thing we can be sure of is that new protocols will be developed by the IETF as
we move forward as an industry. Doug From:
drinks-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of Guyton, Deborah A The
protocol design team has been working on a data model and protocol for the
registry provisioning interface. We
have associated with each public identifier routing information in the form of
resolution answers on the name server. Initially we looked at specific
types of routing info – such as NS and NAPTR Resource Records. We have
heard feedback that this is too DNS-centric. We are discussing collapsing these
into a “generic” Route Object. This may lead to a long set of
attributes, one would be route type, but many others would be optional and may
only apply to a given route type. We
would appreciate some feedback –does it make sense to collapse into a
generic Route Object? Other suggestions are welcome. Thank
you. Please reply to the list. |
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.