Thanks! SVCB looks like an interesting development. We saw with the rollout of CAA that it's actually kind of challenging to add new DNS RRs because a lot of D

Thanks! SVCB looks like an interesting development. We saw with the rollout of CAA that it's actually kind of challenging to add new DNS RRs because a lot of DNS implementations are hard-coded to block ones they don't understand, even though the DNS standards tell them not to do that. So I'm a bit worried that a lot of DNS services will have a hard time with SVCB records for a long while. I guess having SVCB queries get dropped (or return false negatives or spurious errors) would be catastrophic for the ability to negotiate via ECH, since then the client won't know the key, but not catastrophic for the ability to negotiate a TLS session at all (since you can still fall back to CNAME and A/AAAA records in this case).