IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] on private use TLDS

Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us> Fri, 29 November 2019 01:42 UTC

Return-Path: <dougb@dougbarton.us>
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 89AFF1208E4 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Nov 2019 17:42:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=dougbarton.us
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 f85s5Ct4iYuI for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Nov 2019 17:42:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dougbarton.us (dougbarton.us [IPv6:2607:f2f8:ab14::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D309120024 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Nov 2019 17:42:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2600:6c50:17f:7759:b4bf:bc0a:78c5:1a15] (unknown [IPv6:2600:6c50:17f:7759:b4bf:bc0a:78c5:1a15]) by dougbarton.us (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 643401F39 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Nov 2019 17:42:01 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=dougbarton.us; s=dkim; t=1574991721; bh=6uOLgVvLdzdRK4hEtvGSPvAi54KZ0TXba+XuuFp6nJ0=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=U9xCRx1CjJ7/hO3u0fh5JjjTD1pYaxSVAA5yhvFQy5LWt/9cFRebQCgTbaDo2xRHa IceE4IIzow8g9sBVr9rHFCjCKJPy48Srk1Wz0Ftub5gVleNZXroQIJ6pSfdzuCrMEn dVvmvGLag0GF+4kp8Ibs9bnNnjXpxxX/VaANbOlk=
To: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <8796ca33-41a7-85f8-0afe-dbe8666f431b@dougbarton.us> <CAJhMdTPOx1DMMcG1GvqtaFhg0ngg_qEkLhGhHjyXbcmcwg2=JQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us>
Message-ID: <0496a5c1-b9ef-4dfc-311d-5d0744f1e0e8@dougbarton.us>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 17:42:01 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAJhMdTPOx1DMMcG1GvqtaFhg0ngg_qEkLhGhHjyXbcmcwg2=JQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/1aUY1ym56ujuKHFh1wdEamnyLz4>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] on private use TLDS
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 29 Nov 2019 01:42:02 -0000

On 11/28/19 4:24 PM, Joe Abley wrote:
> On Nov 28, 2019, at 19:07, Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us> wrote:
> 
>> Can you please explain why ICANN's work on name collision and the ongoing onslaught of queries at the root for un-delegated TLDs are not sufficient evidence?
> 
> If it's not obvious from the questions I asked, then perhaps not.

What I'm looking for are specific areas in which the existing volume of 
evidence is lacking. We already have a lot of data which addresses the 
questions you raised. What is it about the existing data which is 
inadequate? What data do you want to see collected instead?

>> And if not, how do you propose that we study it?
> 
> By avoiding words like "onslaught" and building substantiated
> conclusions from data.

Thank you for defining "study." What I'm looking for is a specific plan. 
If you don't have one in mind, or can't be bothered to create one, then 
this feels like another example of "We have to study the problem more" 
as an excuse not to take action. (I would be very happy to be proven 
wrong though.)

Doug

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email