IETF Logo Mail Archive

[DNSOP] More after onion? was Re: Some distinctions and a request

Edward Lewis <edward.lewis@icann.org> Wed, 01 July 2015 12:26 UTC

Return-Path: <edward.lewis@icann.org>
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 0119F1A21BE for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Jul 2015 05:26:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.431
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.431 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, 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 7syp222kpmtx for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Jul 2015 05:26:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out.west.pexch112.icann.org (pfe112-ca-1.pexch112.icann.org [64.78.40.7]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55DD11A1BFF for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Jul 2015 05:26:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.21) by PMBX112-W1-CA-2.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1044.25; Wed, 1 Jul 2015 05:26:44 -0700
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 15.00.1044.021; Wed, 1 Jul 2015 05:26:43 -0700
From: Edward Lewis <edward.lewis@icann.org>
To: "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: More after onion? was Re: [DNSOP] Some distinctions and a request
Thread-Index: AQHQs/kw1o35wJblQUGa+TblzKphHw==
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2015 12:26:43 +0000
Message-ID: <D1B951E7.C996%edward.lewis@icann.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.2.150604
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_3518583998_20785060"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/86TgygSCRRbb4ZLXdytNXZ5PU5Y>
Cc: str4d <str4d@i2pmail.org>
Subject: [DNSOP] More after onion? was Re: Some distinctions and a request
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: Wed, 01 Jul 2015 12:26:50 -0000

On 7/1/15, 1:47, "DNSOP on behalf of str4d" <dnsop-bounces@ietf.org on
behalf of str4d@i2pmail.org> wrote:
>.onion and .i2p (and to my knowledge, the other proposed P2P-Names
>TLDs too) have to conform to DNS rules in order to be usable in legacy
>applications that expect domain names.

I'd been told that "onion." was a one-time thing, that in the future
conflicts wouldn't happen.  What I read in the quoted message is that
"onion."'s request isn't a one-time thing but a sign of things to come.

I'm sympathetic to the use the path of least resistance - e.g., use names
that syntactically are DNS names - instead of building a separate
application base.  I expect innovation to be free-form and thus a stream
of unpredictable requests to reserve names for special purposes, including
DNS-like names.

What DNSOP can comment on is how the DNS "reacts" to names, whether in
protocol or operational convention, once they are known before they
achieve some degree of widespread adoption. To what extent is an effort
made (by whomever) to detect these budding namespaces, is this proactive?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email