Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Mon, 20 March 2017 15:44 UTC

Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.com>
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 2BF12127A97 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Mar 2017 08:44:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Nhv67UNlqmFz for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Mar 2017 08:43:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.smeinc.net (mail.smeinc.net [209.135.209.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A5861294D3 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Mar 2017 08:43:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9486130026B for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Mar 2017 11:43:54 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.smeinc.net
Received: from mail.smeinc.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.smeinc.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id QxJ-dkooL3sC for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Mar 2017 11:43:53 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from a860b60074bd.home (pool-108-45-101-150.washdc.fios.verizon.net [108.45.101.150]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 467DC300254; Mon, 20 Mar 2017 11:43:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Message-Id: <61FD3EE3-3043-4AB1-9823-6A9D61B1438C@vigilsec.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_84DBC1AE-F04E-4514-9A8E-E55D7A032DD8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 11:43:52 -0400
In-Reply-To: <1E14B142-680B-4E30-809B-68E03EB6E326@gmail.com>
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
To: Terry Manderson <terry.manderson@icann.org>
References: <1E14B142-680B-4E30-809B-68E03EB6E326@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/3r8RSGmMDoTp6YKrwKCXG8UwQ6Q>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03
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: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 15:44:00 -0000

I have a big problem with Section 6 of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03.  If the domain name is to be published in the root zone, then I do not think that the special-use TLD registration is appropriate.  That said, if the requirement for publication in the root zone is removed, I do not have a problem with proceeding with a special-use TLD registration.

Russ


> On Mar 19, 2017, at 9:44 PM, Suzanne Woolf <suzworldwide@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> The INT Area Director who oversees the homenet WG, Terry Manderson, has asked DNSOP participants to review https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03.txt <https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03.txt>, "Special Use Top Level Domain '.homenet’”, with the following aspects in mind:
> 
> 1) in terms of RFC6761
> 
> 2) in terms of the _operational_ position of an unsigned entry in the root zone as requested in this document, to break the chain of trust for local DNS resolution of .homenet names.
> 
> This document is the product of the homenet WG, which has asked the IESG to approve it for publication, so our comments are strictly advisory to the IESG. There was some discussion of the draft on this list shortly after it appeared, in November 2016, but it’s always the AD’s prerogative to ask for additional review.
> 
> 
> 
> thanks,
> Suzanne & Tim