Re: [DNSOP] DNSOPMoving forward on draft-ietf-dnsop-private-tld

Michael StJohns <> Sun, 01 August 2021 22:04 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C79C13A1489 for <>; Sun, 1 Aug 2021 15:04:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yLnUk4NVxj6z for <>; Sun, 1 Aug 2021 15:03:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CAD043A1484 for <>; Sun, 1 Aug 2021 15:03:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id b20so14948940qkj.3 for <>; Sun, 01 Aug 2021 15:03:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=8rFpygICsjypx6h44UqFLK7Rk7PsTclaAhXIF7XWzBM=; b=r0hHX8ScRAgFKdjGEzXjMEVbxFPAthSvYnlj3+AT3KjfslZFNFyVgxsWWATwhibI2r Npr0a1Pm4IBWlzdQ3OvK4gL3PU9xhi5XKiDfADGCj7YVRwECbS4rgxCfyHq7lWV4T6pA BLFPeoBcIXDDxkylNpoVWmXl4tm1Wpxqm2cmOQtjXj9+timqO+O/DRYS06ucfR2I/JVq giWAyUvOglwiXB5GOF9BGhMfAWKyh8feJTx3mU15KoFkU9yP8z/muoPYHs8YllEODgCk 52AbYeR2wGPLzCFhg+agGBOvHBw/chWu20jfq/ndGIMekaAgXVBeaXhkY1d7XTofoL+o biAg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=8rFpygICsjypx6h44UqFLK7Rk7PsTclaAhXIF7XWzBM=; b=WvOX4OMz8UxKLSU4+6AvwjYzQ9vSAYzvtjhKFzx4eUSrbL4S2YYu9qJhJXO/os0S5s JkpOEEBaI24RjkfEn5OVjTk0trin2d7pUHl4/U5SkWICUXQeJ08FMD+uO+yQakujM+5m Z+zDi6G4TlbfPHhho4CzvK4ZO7uaK1B0JQZ4qPFyfEvXE8KYtSprPVASYZWc6g2dud4D yFdiW2mlWmd8y9GcbejAcD/XOv/rA8lhbllXe5KdmzGl5HW/a/YzI/UtxF7eR8k15Fhe Cfr1/oNxepcUX17cZBK0XySFwuRKYX6/U/VfirlK0OE/sbNZf+OPrmKG5P/COHc0KvhM A8vw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532psEMKsiIs+BJ4ROS83iaXbe6xv7jojZNbzCH1Z3IeGgWJhQWM WsNpJddqrztXxiKGPERkFO75Nq1cIuh3dwAX
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwlrVsSXyO9BhnNF8O6M9dmMrAo4TPnTV3IJ/PBOq0EcRMJCvUzlo9K6N0Echu79rbY0kXcig==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:1137:: with SMTP id p23mr13227361qkk.490.1627855432985; Sun, 01 Aug 2021 15:03:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id d25sm3766393qtw.59.2021. for <> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 01 Aug 2021 15:03:52 -0700 (PDT)
References: <> <> <>
From: Michael StJohns <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2021 18:03:51 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.12.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] DNSOPMoving forward on draft-ietf-dnsop-private-tld
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2021 22:04:01 -0000

Actually, maybe there should be a general document "DNS Squatting 
Considered Harmful"?   I personally don't see any real difference 
between squatting on "onion" vs squatting on "zz" except that we ended 
up with a ex post facto approval of .onion.   And that AIRC was a near 

So maybe:

1) The IETF and/or ICANN will not allocate any of the 2 letter country 
codes as TLDs unless and until that code is allocated to a country by ISO.
2) Any one squatting on unassigned codes should not expect remediation 
from either the IETF or ICANN if that code is later allocated to a country.
3) As a general matter TLDs of any form unassigned by ICANN should not 
be used for private use.  Please pursue a special assignment via the 
IETF asking for concurrence from ICANN. Other language about how the 
assignment might not occur, might occur, but not for the purpose 
requested, etc.


On 8/1/2021 5:50 PM, Roy Arends wrote:
>> On 30 Jul 2021, at 23:34, Wes Hardaker <> wrote:
>> Roy Arends <> writes:
>>> Essentially, instead of making the pond safe, we’ll have a warning
>>> sign that using the pond is at their own risk.
>> The wording of said warning sign is the critical element, IMHO.
>> Certainly my support of the document greatly depends on said wording.
> Sure.
>> In the end, there should be a goal behind why we want to publish
>> something.  If that goal is "know people do this.  don't do this.
>> please stop", then that may be a reasonable goal.  If we're just going
>> to document history, without recommendations (to stop), then I think it
>> may bring more harm than good.
> IMHO, we should document that people do this, and that there are risks when people do this, and document what these risks are.
> Warmly
> Roy
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list