Re: [DNSOP] additional special names Fwd: I-D Action: draft-chapin-additional-reserved-tlds-00.txt

Joe Abley <> Tue, 04 February 2014 15:15 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D2BD1A0160 for <>; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 07:15:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D5zysfr65EoL for <>; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 07:15:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c00::230]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBE761A011C for <>; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 07:15:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id f11so12321406qae.7 for <>; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 07:15:12 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=google; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=I5qM3oucfn9+VX5KY1aIS3BcWTzAI4NL3kSx54doWmk=; b=F9uAhUx2PEzdWJgAFK3fBvedXzQ/tQVYEoXN+SqwLZjQNWb9d6seJQsGKlTcydJ69+ cnAg27JHPAVWdRPoTgEb0fEAoyIz4yp5i5LmUfIRLrPxsJ6fuG1cZaR8c4J/UrqIHJcu 8wtuvv1TtzBqyfHr0SmWb8PY3HW8SOMK2ShCA=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references:to; bh=I5qM3oucfn9+VX5KY1aIS3BcWTzAI4NL3kSx54doWmk=; b=c/ChbtfngwmceWBnlFO9clxWw2qEeUU9kllrPiauvYXkcTQX7RiBfxLv7RvRRlWLkT 9T5h/CQCUb5Uq6cmd3a75LfzO6bwXN5bLj225TsNCw3t5HSFceGXchPb9h/XHbFZa90s EGj3APxryfihDPPwkIiBq1m0F0r46hWOxqvsgBYVNGsj15lwMzutKxfhH8941APBHRP6 niMkb0MYjgrrqZ2BvZTSh1+Ku8J1lARXV1ev1wtuCOlgIpuZ1SNnltCKrPsmMtPWSwZx IuiOUP+CTxRUig1XneJ1Gmo9r2mmCTr6hChH6FGbQnR4GnvtAFsjJ2AH+vxtcfDKligW SKlg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlMk1mxr02j5bU5oQxz+HR3fGbvp9sxs91Qm6u7gkFSmelRhYuzdra81CAWjE/kppuZngv1
X-Received: by with SMTP id t49mr63445062qgd.97.1391526912222; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 07:15:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id f10sm67643429qar.12.2014. for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 04 Feb 2014 07:15:11 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_12835AD0-C13F-4CBE-A6F5-69A649566AB5"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
From: Joe Abley <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 10:15:05 -0500
Message-Id: <>
References: <20140204063911.55905.qmail@joyce.lan> <> <>
To: Paul Vixie <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
Cc: " WG" <>, John Levine <>, Andrew Sullivan <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] additional special names Fwd: I-D Action: draft-chapin-additional-reserved-tlds-00.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 15:15:14 -0000

On 2014-02-04, at 10:00, Paul Vixie <> wrote:

> Joe Abley wrote:
>> ...
>> ONION is like LOCAL. Neither are like ARPA (or any other TLD).
> How like LOCAL is ONION?

Neither is a zone in the DNS or a domain in the DNS namespace, and both refer to names for which a protocol other than DNS should be used for resolution.

(I realise the protocol for LOCAL is DNS-like, but it's not DNS, right?)

> ICANN knows it can't sell .LOCAL, but does
> ICANN know it can't sell .ONION ?

I was never quite sure what ICANN knew, even when I worked for ICANN.

I'm not arguing against the IETF protecting the world from conflicting ONION namespaces in the same way that they did with LOCAL, which would have the effect that ICANN would not sell ONION. I agree that if ICANN sold ONION to someone, the result would be messy.

However, I don't think ambiguity in the discussion about the namespaces we're talking about or the failure modes we're hoping to avoid helps us narrow in on anything resembling consensus.