IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@shinkuro.com> Tue, 14 September 2010 14:21 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-dnsext-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-dnsext-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF17C3A6909; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 07:21:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.994
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.994 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.605, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7Ojs39HdItSN; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 07:21:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from psg.com (psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EE583A6904; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 07:21:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.72 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>) id 1OvWKj-000IL8-AK for namedroppers-data0@psg.com; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 14:18:05 +0000
Received: from mail.yitter.info ([208.86.224.201]) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.72 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <ajs@shinkuro.com>) id 1OvWKg-000IKk-Dc for namedroppers@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 14:18:02 +0000
Received: from crankycanuck.ca (69-196-144-230.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.144.230]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B34891ECB408 for <namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 14:17:59 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 10:17:58 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@shinkuro.com>
To: namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dnsext] RFC 2142 and "organization's top level domain"
Message-ID: <20100914141757.GF22634@shinkuro.com>
Mail-Followup-To: namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
References: <4C8AD1C5.1050601@dcrocker.net> <4C8EAA64.5060202@chrysler.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4C8EAA64.5060202@chrysler.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Sender: owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <namedroppers.ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: To unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
List-Unsubscribe: the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
List-Archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 06:49:08PM -0400, Kevin Darcy wrote:

> I don't know that it's possible to retain hierarchism without defining  
> the relevant words/terms from the DNS realm, but if defining-verbiage  
> cannot be avoided, the jargon term "apex" might be shortest and crispest  
> one to use, as in "[organization's] apex domain". It would only need to  
> be defined *once*, of course, and that would cover all 3 uses of the 
> term.

When the discussion came up on the applications list, the original
suggestion included the word "delegated".  As discussion proceeded, it
became clear that some domains weren't delegated, and therefore we
couldn't use that word.

I'm afraid "apex" has the same problem.  The apex of a zone is a
well-defined notion in the DNS (and given the number of slack
definitions we have in the DNS, well-defined terms are to be valued).  

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@shinkuro.com
Shinkuro, Inc.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email