Re: [DNSOP] DNS names for local networks - not only home residental networks ...

"Walter H." <walter.h@mathemainzel.info> Tue, 05 September 2017 04:09 UTC

Return-Path: <walter.h@mathemainzel.info>
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 DDAE71321A5 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Sep 2017 21:09:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mathemainzel.info
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 6kVugoAPJQFc for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Sep 2017 21:09:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx17lb.world4you.com (mx17lb.world4you.com [81.19.149.127]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 797AC1241F3 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Sep 2017 21:09:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mathemainzel.info; s=dkim11; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Cc:To:From:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID; bh=mwDAaicq9JnNWGyGWk4rgSbAKaqfUfR2qvDtqX4eY/8=; b=wlv+QfAA5vH7nk5rwyhN5fWfPbRx3gWqWgn1wVbM9+qOJK2pSkq6rcI5M4I4xnAaUsqfLvcmvWdvpK8cPUAMUAg0Ru0PfB50UgGVDEy9IdCtvJUKOkbeGYvAEE5hGE+acnKPOz0y/cG46pbQOHa+WTHLTNWLrnWFmwQJm/m9TMw=;
Received: from [90.146.55.206] (helo=home.mail) by mx17lb.world4you.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <walter.h@mathemainzel.info>) id 1dp5Ah-0004ME-Uo; Tue, 05 Sep 2017 06:09:07 +0200
Message-ID: <d36b860a6bc8b42fbb1ba3bf3f4ce03a.1504584546@squirrel.mail>
In-Reply-To: <C6EEB652-0EAE-48EE-A0CF-938E0D24862A@dotat.at>
References: <150428805872.6417.9525310755360551475@ietfa.amsl.com> <59A9B760.2060209@mathemainzel.info> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1709012044210.2676@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk> <59A9BCA2.6060008@mathemainzel.info> <20170903043202.GA18082@besserwisser.org> <59AC4E42.9080600@mathemainzel.info> <60304450-DFA3-4982-B01D-CC33C49BDCFC@isc.org> <351E3E93-30AF-4F38-ADE0-178DE402D14F@vpnc.org> <C6EEB652-0EAE-48EE-A0CF-938E0D24862A@dotat.at>
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2017 06:09:06 +0200
From: "Walter H." <walter.h@mathemainzel.info>
To: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
Cc: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>, "Walter H." <walter.h@mathemainzel.info>, "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (UNIX; U; Cray X-MP/48; en-US; rv:2.70) Gecko/20110929 Communicator/7.20
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Importance: Normal
X-SA-Do-Not-Run: Yes
X-AV-Do-Run: Yes
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 90.146.55.206
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: walter.h@mathemainzel.info
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on mx17lb.world4you.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/08nJEZREQ0YFU6oKRmoyQO584ew>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] DNS names for local networks - not only home residental networks ...
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Tue, 05 Sep 2017 04:09:11 -0000

On Mon, September 4, 2017 21:29, Tony Finch wrote:
>
> However, Microsoft did encourage their customers to use .local names for
> Active Directory domains for quite a long time - see for example this link
> to the documentation for Windows Small Business Server 2003. It isn't fair
> to only blame MS customers for choosing .local domains.
>
> https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc747455(v=ws.10).aspx

I see it exact this, and it would be fair to prevent future bugs with
defining one or two FAKE TLDs (e.g. .corp, .lan) for exact this use case;

as I said there are 2 points:
- there isn't really a uniqness as requirement
- a public WHOIS grabbing for these domains needn't also be given;