IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] draft-wkumari-dnsop-alt-tld-04

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Thu, 12 February 2015 12:49 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77F351A6EE1 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 04:49:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 o6rtCzSwJDiS for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 04:49:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com (sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com [64.89.234.25]) (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 D17501A87B9 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 04:49:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certificate Authority - G2" (verified OK)) by sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B77CBDA02D4 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 12:49:30 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-03.win.nominum.com [64.89.235.66]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certificate Authority - G2" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7210653E084; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 04:49:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.0.20.107] (71.233.43.215) by CAS-03.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (64.89.235.66) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.224.2; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 04:49:30 -0800
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKr6gn302PSFdqVwH2m=drEZ02_kw+3ioQ4Wz++LnVyK6Z_PDA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 07:49:27 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <5E0556E9-F579-42CB-9A20-FC1B2F382D3B@nominum.com>
References: <20150212063638.GD6950@mx1.yitter.info> <CAKr6gn302PSFdqVwH2m=drEZ02_kw+3ioQ4Wz++LnVyK6Z_PDA@mail.gmail.com>
To: George Michaelson <ggm@algebras.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
X-Originating-IP: [71.233.43.215]
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/2Qp9wQP1nXuKoA7-amqVDie_YxI>
Cc: dnsop WG <dnsop@ietf.org>, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] draft-wkumari-dnsop-alt-tld-04
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 12:49:32 -0000

On Feb 12, 2015, at 1:44 AM, George Michaelson <ggm@algebras.org> wrote:
> Technology wise, this is short, and simple and clear. Would we had this before .onion eventuated, and dare I say it even .local from another time and place. WIring a TLD to be used for alternate namespaces so that we can safely anchor non-DNS names into the DNS and avoid repetitious stupidity is a good plan.

I think that if .alt had existed when .local was defined, nothing would have been different. From a UI perspective, using an extra label to identify that a particular domain is special-use is worse, because it's more typing, and doesn't really make sense--which makes more sense: "myhost.local" or "myhost.local.alt"?

So I think this work is worth doing, because there are probably cases where .alt will do just fine, but I don't think it gets rid of the problem of top-level special-use domains.  The "SHOULD" recommendation in the document is the right level of applicability: "MUST" would be wrong, and I appreciate that the authors did not use it.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email