[DNSOP] Re: Registration request - missing "_tls" entr y in the Underscored and Globally Scoped DNS Node Names registry (RFC 8460)

> On Aug 18, 2026, at 9:52 AM, Paul Wouters <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 18 Aug 2026, John Levine wrote:
> 
>> According to Dan Mahoney  <[email protected]>:
>>> Hello,
>>> 
>>> I am Requesting the following addition to the "Underscored and Globally
>>> Scoped DNS Node Names" registry, per RFC 8552 Section 3:
>>> 
>>> RR Type _NODE NAME Reference
>>> TXT  _tls  RFC 8460
>>> 
>>> RFC 8460 (SMTP TLS Reporting) defines a TXT record at
>>> _smtp._tls.<domain>. Under RFC 8552, the name that actually needs
>>> registering is the one closest to the root - here, "_tls" - with
>>> "_smtp" as a subordinate name under it. Subordinate names aren't
>>> separately registered; they're the responsibility of whoever holds
>>> the parent entry, so this is not a request to also add "_smtp".
>>> 
>>> This looks like a oversight from prior work.
> 
> It seems to be yes.
> 
>> It's more of a race condition.  RFCs 8460 and 8553 were written at about
>> the same time and we didn't think to do another pass over newly published
>> RFCs after the last draft of 8553.
>> 
>>> I believe this falls under the "Expert Review" process in RFC 8552
>> 
>> Agreed.  IANA has a form for you to submit here:
>> 
>> https://www.iana.org/form/protocol-assignment
> 
> This is the process, yes.

I'll go fill that out just for the sake of completeness.  (Done)

> 
>> At least one of the experts is a regular contributor here so
>> perhaps they could say whether they need more.
> 
> I am the person John is likely eluding to. Frederico is the other DE,
> and I've added him to the CC:.
> 
> This is a bit of a weird one. Normally, we would be a bit careful with
> such generic prefixes and RFC 8460 doesn't actually say anything
> about the _tls prefix, only about the _smtp._tls prefix.
> 
> Presumably, we would want everyone under _tls to use a protocol/service
> prefix but that is not something a FCFS registry can enforce. So I
> think it is best to just accept a registration request once it is filed
> and perhaps we can find someone who wants to write a short draft that
> updates 8460 to clarify how to use the _tls prefix.

I'm not one of the authors of 8460, but wouldn't mind taking a stab at this or perhaps coauthoring, although it feels like mostly a formality.  Also note that I'm likely to be in San Francisco in November.

Best,

-Dan

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]