Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-13: (with COMMENT)

Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> Fri, 31 August 2018 19:07 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C814D128CFD; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 12:07:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.88
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.88 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ukxbzyIq2ZYe; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 12:07:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0151124C04; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 12:07:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.95] (cpe-70-122-203-106.tx.res.rr.com [70.122.203.106]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id w7VJ7Gi0003969 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 31 Aug 2018 14:07:17 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-70-122-203-106.tx.res.rr.com [70.122.203.106] claimed to be [10.0.1.95]
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
Message-Id: <8EF56008-F8A5-43FF-87CD-5BF43B34DF83@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5ECB508E-D997-4F07-9FCB-4A2FC3BE08B3"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 14:07:15 -0500
In-Reply-To: <1B001878-36F4-44AD-8A55-94010E05455D@icann.org>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis@ietf.org>, "suzworldwide@gmail.com" <suzworldwide@gmail.com>, "dnsop-chairs@ietf.org" <dnsop-chairs@ietf.org>, "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
References: <153551625931.6434.17749924379575082790.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <1B001878-36F4-44AD-8A55-94010E05455D@icann.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/-gWmBGJ1GWhpk90OPhenPYUjQek>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-13: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 19:07:44 -0000

That all looks fine, thanks!

Ben.

> On Aug 31, 2018, at 9:41 AM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>; wrote:
> 
> On Aug 29, 2018, at 12:17 AM, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>; wrote:
>> ยง2"
>> - Definition of "Domain Name": I don't profess to be a naming expert, but this
>> definition doesn't seem very satisfying.
> 
> It was unsatisfying to everyone, but deemed better than the nothing that we had before this. It would be grand if someone (more likely the IAB than the IESG) pulled together a work team to answer "what is a name, really, when you think hard about it?" Domain names would be a subset of this (if there was a usable answer).
> 
>> It potentially defines things that I
>> wouldn't consider domain names.
> 
> We tried to prevent that, but we wanted to keep to defining "domain names" without prejudice of DNS names.
> 
>> Is there no representation, intent, or other
>> context that distinguishes an ordered list of labels that is a domain name from
>> your garden variety ordered lists of labels? (or is the point of this that they
>> cannot be distinguished?)
> 
> The latter.
> 
>> - Definition of IDN: 'The current standard, normally called "IDNA2008"...'
>> That may not age well. I suggest  something to the effect of "The current
>> standard at the time of this writing, ..."
> 
> Good point, will add.
> 
> --Paul Hoffman