[DNSOP] New Version Notification for draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem-06.txt
Alain Durand <alain.durand@icann.org> Sat, 10 September 2016 14:43 UTC
Return-Path: <alain.durand@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 5A8DD12B142 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 10 Sep 2016 07:43:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.709
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.709 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.508, 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 E6ube5Bwcw1E for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 10 Sep 2016 07:43:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out.west.pexch112.icann.org (pfe112-ca-1.pexch112.icann.org [64.78.40.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9F01128E18 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sat, 10 Sep 2016 07:43:30 -0700 (PDT)
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; Sat, 10 Sep 2016 07:43:28 -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 15.00.1178.000; Sat, 10 Sep 2016 07:43:28 -0700
From: Alain Durand <alain.durand@icann.org>
To: "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: New Version Notification for draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem-06.txt
Thread-Index: AQHSC3DakDSpVfcRdk+IGC7XPf92ZQ==
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 14:43:28 +0000
Message-ID: <AF2D12D5-DE13-454C-B7AD-82612BFA5D16@icann.org>
References: <147351822581.32623.6425240609941239479.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [192.0.47.234]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_0E4E2F03-3969-4482-99EA-B3177E9BBE86"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/8GIX6P5uE4TBvBgXygN-xlM3-Fg>
Subject: [DNSOP] New Version Notification for draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem-06.txt
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: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 14:43:32 -0000
Dear wg, We published today a new version of draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem. The draft has been simplified even further in an attempt to make it more readable. Also, the abstract clarifies that this document is a problem statement about issues around RFC6761 and not a problem statement around the larger set of issues of special use names. See new abstract: 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, and may or may not share the same namespace. When an end-user triggers resolution of a name on a system that supports multiple, different protocols or resolution mechanisms, it is desirable that the protocol used is unambiguous, and that requests intended for one protocol are not inadvertently answered using another protocol. RFC 6761 introduced a framework by which a particular domain name could be acknowledged as being special. Various challenges have become apparent with this application of the guidance provided in RFC 6761. This document focuses solely on documenting the specific challenges created by RFC 6761 in the form of a problem statement in order to facilitate further discussions of potential solutions. In particular, it refrains from proposing or promoting any solution. Also, the current document does not focus on other general issues related to the use of special use domain names. URL: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem-06.txt Alain, on behalf of the other authors.
- [DNSOP] New Version Notification for draft-adpkja… Alain Durand