[DNSOP] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem-00.txt

"Joe Abley" <jabley@hopcount.ca> Thu, 29 October 2015 13:27 UTC

Return-Path: <jabley@hopcount.ca>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36B5B1A6FC3 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 06:27:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wVQTVtC3L9Lg for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 06:26:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-x22d.google.com (mail-qk0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22d]) (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 4C1831A6FBC for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 06:26:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qkcl124 with SMTP id l124so13587647qkc.3 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 06:26:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hopcount.ca; s=google; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cR5gThTBJ9tOp5rg0iCJ4pZlU/cNEuhL24GWOrGpCSY=; b=JrdNbM1FaXmi3BCSbxss5ZyHxiSJ5eiKna3bHnh22WNyZn4Z/nyKlg5AcI+qapoWl+ Pnjt6WjSo6WqiSmrNkv0NH8MFnA/dN61rEJtfADC8unKv1uLApqSOineTtW5mb+G8fXv ApcEWvzvUffmINd8hb2mPAd5k0ooVGmHiA9R8=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:subject:date:message-id:references :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cR5gThTBJ9tOp5rg0iCJ4pZlU/cNEuhL24GWOrGpCSY=; b=QfjMm2OX6WNLp6V5IwJWaFrr/DKcmejtWmTkEW6sms1Ug2c0njdKCliNIjm3nwjcEb bA1uV/U3KN4szWWbCnhAjUNnIUiDgUgAnO8iKEFM5YKyjIB1O6XspzVx2fieism2v7RO XWIeMDC08IUi9ZWEfrPI2Ab3vMBpHADCiy6+42dV5YlXmt2gtVL+KOqFn9ZkGNnsi0Ca BiTuLfbnTFp6qmjL3BVWjmKyPNeyWRJMbhS3vsZzp6grRHgEdwFR1Yj+POLTfXkC1Biq xSL6PWLWZSj3xIMj88NNb1TiNQ7btgo2neMlRWicKa14DBzqN8ocRIMuOqE19s0GbKGU Jozg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnSdBU1fGhpIVhsSaoD5aR8WkHL3XKWKhae5stQiM1hIovfvSV8rteydUZLMe0AQohHaB58
X-Received: by with SMTP id v63mr2111324qka.105.1446125217386; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 06:26:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] (135-23-68-43.cpe.pppoe.ca. []) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f81sm548452qhc.14.2015. for <dnsop@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 29 Oct 2015 06:26:56 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
To: dnsop WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 09:26:55 -0400
Message-ID: <68818B75-F6F6-44A1-BAF5-BB68B7BD86F6@hopcount.ca>
References: <20151019232608.9713.92337.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.2r5141)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/2pQhC8lfRBoKeYLQPhvU8xwmI-Y>
Subject: [DNSOP] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem-00.txt
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: <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: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 13:27:01 -0000

Hi all,

Our esteemed chairs have recently outlined a path forward for addressing 
the IESG's concerns relating to the implementation of RFC 6761, 
triggered by the experience of assessing RFC 7686 ('The ".onion" 
Special-Use Domain Name'). The IESG's concerns are summarised in 

Paraphrasing Suz and Tim (please correct me if I mis-speak) the approach 
to be taken in this working group is to try to achieve consensus on a 
problem statement as a first step, following which we will be in better 
shape to have focused discussion of potential solutions. A call for 
volunteers was made to augment an earlier ad-hoc design-team design-team 
to write up that problem statement, consisting of Alain Durand, Peter 
Koch and me, and I gather that some eligible thrill-seekers have already 
put their names forward to join us.

A very rough first cut of a problem statement was submitted hurriedly 
before the 00 cut-off deadline in order to try and move this 
conversation forward (see below). This text doesn't even represent 
particularly strong consensus amongst Peter, Alain and me, never mind 
the yet-to-be-fully-formed design team or the working group as a whole, 
but it's a starting point. An earlier rendering of the text with 
different organisation (that was not submitted) can be found at 

I take full, personal responsibility for the gratuitous definition of 
"aardvark", and the ancient, historical quotes from the namedroppers 
archive that you'll find in appendix A. You're welcome.

I will unfortunately not be in Yokohama next week, but I would encourage 
anybody interested in the general problem space to discuss it on this 
list. I think it's reasonable to consider the current and future design 
team victims to be a secretariat for this discussion, and the content of 
any consensus on this needs to come from an open and transparent 
discussion here, in the working group.


Forwarded message:

> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
> To: Joe Abley <jabley@dyn.com>, Peter Koch <pk@denic.de>, Peter Koch 
> <pk@DENIC.DE>, Alain Durand <alain.durand@icann.org>
> Subject: New Version Notification for 
> draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem-00.txt
> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 16:26:08 -0700
> A new version of I-D, draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem-00.txt
> has been successfully submitted by Alain Durand and posted to the
> IETF repository.
> Name:		draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem
> Revision:	00
> Title:		Problem Statement for the Reservation of Top-Level Domains in 
> the Special-Use Domain Names Registry
> Document date:	2015-10-19
> Group:		Individual Submission
> Pages:		12
> URL:            
> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem-00.txt
> Status:         
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem/
> Htmlized:       
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem-00
> Abstract:
> The dominant protocol for name resolution on the Internet is the
> Domain Name System (DNS).  However, other protocols exist that are
> fundamentally different from the DNS, but which have syntactically-
> similar namespaces.
> When an end-user triggers resolution of a name on a system which
> supports multiple, different protocols for name resolution, it is
> desirable that the protocol to be used is unambiguous, and that
> requests intended for one protocol are not inadvertently addressed
> using another.
> [RFC6761] introduced a framework by which, under certain
> circumstances, a particular domain name could be acknowledged as
> being special.  This framework has been used to make top-level domain
> reservations, that is, particular top-level domains that should not
> be used within the DNS to accommodate parallel use of non-DNS name
> resolution protocols by end-users and avoid the possibility of
> namespace collisions.
> Various challenges have become apparent with this application of the
> guidance provided in [RFC6761].  This document aims to document those
> challenges in the form of a problem statement, to facilitate further
> discussion of potential solutions.
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of 
> submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> The IETF Secretariat