Re: [dnsext] RFC 2142 and "organization's top level domain"

[Brian Dickson <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 9:48 PM, Dave CROCKER <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Folks,
>
> I'm trying to resolve an erratum, on RFC 2142, MAILBOX NAMES FOR COMMON
> SERVICES, ROLES AND FUNCTIONS".  The current focus is a narrow matter of
> nomenclature.  Broader issues about a full revision effort for the document
> are worthy, but outside of the current scope.
>
> RFC 2142 uses the phrase "organization's top level domain".  This refers to
> the string that is delegated to the organization and provides the root of
> any sub-tree to the DNS that they create.  Around the world and around the
> DNS, this 'root' will have two or more fields, such as bbiw.net or
> ucl.ac.uk. (And with recent TLD rule changes, presumably this now is /one/
> or more fields...)
>
> So it would refer to ietf.org, rather than tools.ietf.org or www.ietf.org,
> and ucl.ac.uk, rather than www.ucl.ac.uk or bartlett.ucl.ac.uk, for
> example.
>
> The construct of a domain name that an organization registers, and for
> which it receives a delegation, is important.  Yet there appears to be no
> common term for it.  RFC 2142 was written quite awhile ago.  It uses a term
> that is formally reasonable, but which has become potentially confusing.
>  The reference to "top level" for a domain name, is now so universally taken
> to mean a TLD, that it is reasonable to assume that the "organizational"
> qualifier is not sufficient to move the reader away from the meaning they
> are likely to expect.
>
> So the question is what other term to use?
>
> I raised this question to the IETF applications discussion list and we
> wandered over various choices.  Tony Finch came up with one that I'd like to
> declare the winner, unless you folks come up with something better:
>
>   organization's principal domain name
>
>
> Comments?
>
>

I think, in some regards, "organization" is itself ambiguous, in two
regards.
One, is that a large entity could have several internal organizations.
Second, is that some organizations will have multiple domain names, and each
will need to be identified separately, rather than having one "principal
name", if it is meant to refer to the domain name and not, for example, the
administrative contact for all the domains. (If it is the latter, then the
winner works for me.)

In no particular order, are some suggestions for alternatives:

Domain Name Apex, or Domain Apex Name

Autonomous Domain Name (i.e. indicating the demarcation boundary)

Demarcation Name

Zenith

Alpha Name

Prime Name

Canonical Name (not!)

Brian


> d/
> --
>
>  Dave Crocker
>  Brandenburg InternetWorking
>  bbiw.net
>
>