IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] does making names the same NEED protocol changes at all?

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@shinkuro.com> Fri, 25 February 2011 14:29 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@shinkuro.com>
X-Original-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58F2E3A68D4 for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 06:29:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.584
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.584 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.015, 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 ulSSpWvFhF1I for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 06:29:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.yitter.info (mail.yitter.info [208.86.224.201]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C7EF3A67EC for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 06:29:53 -0800 (PST)
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 F1ACF1ECB408 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 14:30:44 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 09:30:43 -0500
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@shinkuro.com>
To: dnsext@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20110225143043.GB74938@shinkuro.com>
References: <AANLkTin6-mXBeKC_TzgvWUaCyxKfeZxTK1BQvXtpwuCN@mail.gmail.com> <4CC95816-8225-4CAE-897F-3F13F965BCEE@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU> <alpine.LSU.2.00.1102240953550.5244@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk> <AANLkTiniVDDZXFOV4WryNN=+hK29rBO8_HTAqw7bK=Nf@mail.gmail.com> <8657EF4A-A08D-46E5-8917-553AE377CAD8@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU> <AANLkTikHm62x=+xWpSRyERw2cB31yZZhVkTT-90dgFjk@mail.gmail.com> <39EBBA76-22F1-4935-9300-B0078B229793@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU> <5A100E65-FB09-4556-AA5A-BF9FE0468DDA@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU> <AANLkTikECGtJm5WyDnX=s8zTERu89qLbFDebf8R1y4Pa@mail.gmail.com> <6AD400292B2C771C7FE70E8F@Ximines.local>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <6AD400292B2C771C7FE70E8F@Ximines.local>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Subject: Re: [dnsext] does making names the same NEED protocol changes at all?
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 14:29:54 -0000

No hat, I think.

On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 12:48:15PM +0000, Alex Bligh wrote:

> per nation" requirement is long standing), and suggest the answer is "give
> up the aliasing requirement or enforce it by contract with your TLDs".

Two things:

1.  The issue before us is not merely a TLD or near-TLD one.  If we
work as though it is, then we're not doing our jobs.

2.  Notwithstanding the above, there are some delegation relationships
that are less fraught than others.  There are all sorts of prickly
layer-9+ issues implicit in talking about a contract between a private
US corporation and the sovereign power of foreign nations, and I think
we maybe want to avoid exploring that warren.

A

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email