Re: [apps-discuss] [taugh.com-standards] Comments on draft-levine-orgboundary

[Andrew Sullivan <[e-mail]>]

On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 09:16:12AM -0400, John R Levine wrote:

> Unfortunately, that doesn't work.
> 
>   aaa.foo.ontario.ca and bbb.foo.ontario.ca are the same entity
> 
>   aaa.toronto.ontario.ca and bbb.toronto.ontario.ca are not

To be clear if slightly pedantic about the example, the current
registration rules don't permit the first case any more.  Also as I
understand it, case (2) sort of depends on what you mean by "same
entity".  Everything of the form [municipality].[province].ca under
the current rules must be a department of the municipality.  You can't
register (for instance) somecompany.toronto.on.ca.  This is under the
CIRA rules for the delegation of [municipality].[province].ca.

Now, none of that obviates your basic point, which is that this
pattern is still possible.  But that argument, it seems to me, leads
almost inexorably to the conclusion that you almost certainly need to
descend the tree; and once you've gone that far the overall opt-in
model I've argued for starts to look like it makes more sense.  (I
still appreciate the problem of having to maintain a record for every
name beneath one of these policy cuts.)

> These have lousy DNS cache behavior, but the closest encloser rule
> means that you can find the cut point for any domain with one UDP
> lookup.

Ok, but I'm not sure the cut point is the thing that makes the
difference.  For instance, there is no zone cut at dyndns.org, but
that name is (and certainly should be) administratively separate from
everything beneath it.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[e-mail]