Re: [DNSOP] DNSOP Call for Adoption - draft-west-let-localhost-be-localhost

[Wes Hardaker <[e-mail]>]

"John Levine" <[e-mail]> writes:

> It seems to me that if someone has enough programming skill to write a
> DNSSEC verifier for her cache or stub resolver, she has enough skill
> to treat localhost as a special case.

I've been trying to figure out for a few days now how to insert my
opinion.  It's kinda like the above but not.  Specifically, we have
multiple naming systems already, and I'd argue that localhost actually
isn't in the DNS naming system.  There is no authoritative source for
it.  In fact, DNSSEC proves this.

Instead, localhost is a operating system convention, a /etc/hosts name,
an NIS name, or one of the other things that is able to resolve that
name.  But the DNS is not where that resolution comes from.

Now, how do we ensure that a conflict never happens?  That's a better
discussion and there are a few options ranging from policy to ensure
it's never assigned, to actually registering it, to...
-- 
Wes Hardaker
USC/ISI