Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Re: Ed's comment s on Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps

Edward Lewis <edward.lewis@icann.org> Thu, 16 February 2017 17:47 UTC

Return-Path: <edward.lewis@icann.org>
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 9B7A7129535 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 09:47:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.202
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 LgNqXmd6fbCs for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 09:47:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out.west.pexch112.icann.org (pfe112-ca-2.pexch112.icann.org [64.78.40.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D44251294F1 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 09:47:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.21) by PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 09:47:49 -0800
Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org ([64.78.40.21]) by PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG ([64.78.40.21]) with mapi id 15.00.1178.000; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 09:47:49 -0800
From: Edward Lewis <edward.lewis@icann.org>
To: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Ext] Re: [DNSOP] Ed's comment s on Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps
Thread-Index: AQHSiHRBXdLVQC0lkkyHYZOxQSwNAKFsZ/qA//+y+gA=
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 17:47:48 +0000
Message-ID: <399731CA-227F-4FC3-B009-4D1861C2BC3F@icann.org>
References: <F56640AF-27DF-425F-B844-8453DE02987E@icann.org> <A4F1EFFD-FC65-4C69-92E8-A6587AD767EF@vigilsec.com> <9F197C8D-77F6-430F-8D71-B338BFB998EB@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <9F197C8D-77F6-430F-8D71-B338BFB998EB@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.1e.0.170107
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [192.0.47.234]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="B_3570094068_2001056001"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/7iGN4A9mwuRhTYskGAheynezMkE>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Re: Ed's comment s on Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 16 Feb 2017 17:47:53 -0000

On 2/16/17, 12:23, "Suzanne Woolf" <suzworldwide@gmail.com> wrote:
On Feb 16, 2017, at 11:46 AM, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> wrote:
Ed: 
>>>It would be good to provide a list of requests for new special use names.
>>>Especially for a problem statement, this provides a way to estimate the 
>>>"size and shape" of the problem and the urgency.
(Russ:)
>>No matter how you count, the volume will remain small if this is done 
>>properly.  However, the special name requests can still be 
>>important and urgent.
(Suzanne:)
>I also note it’s fairly difficult to estimate. 
>
>... .home/.corp/.mail ... .onion ... .alt ... .homenet 

There is also a use of .id by Blockstack? as opposed to the ccTLD for Indonesia.  (This one just jumps to mind.)

I did some looking and despite thinking there was once a backlog of a dozen, I haven't come across it in the mailing list.  (I could be wrong.)  What about .belkin, often cited as a string seen but not allocated?

My goal is to see the problem statement document get more detailed so we can know when we've solved the problem.  ("The problem" is meant to be general, not necessarily the problem at hand.)

>All of the drafts besides those for .onion, .alt, and .homenet have expired, which tells us nothing about whether or how they might come back.

I don't think liveness of drafts is a sufficient measure of activity, considering the problem statement talks about uses from folks not engaging in the IETF process.  (If I'm hungry and in line at a restaurant, then walk away because the wait is too long, I'm still hungry.)