IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] on private use TLDS

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Fri, 29 November 2019 01:18 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
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 5127E1208CA for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Nov 2019 17:18:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=1AtTyfVI; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=Pe7Bbck5
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 uUgPBV50aR0a for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Nov 2019 17:18:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D80A120801 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Nov 2019 17:18:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 96078 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2019 01:18:45 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=1774c.5de071f5.k1911; i=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=ZAzNvFyv02eGXqMuD54dqlQqiSUPWtM5o8GZ0etXvok=; b=1AtTyfVIsTvnWWSHxk7ZRwxVHnhdeMtKUMrA+xiNM521f1BuvViwsb3a03LmJEwvtPHgqCCEfrdrOuZwBb4kWepxhu0mfMyTDGwWEzPZTO+YIeXDJdaaSx423/tO8s9jGqz+lZKOLOY4rr1qime5rG3IShwxuO32rnD+DvQS1BrdTg8cCZL5Rn0q+sg8qCnKrRBHbHxE+2lJIZuGDMpGUX6/olvgSv8wSdrOSjovFiYdV7OgSQ50/7rhH/6S1w5H
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=1774c.5de071f5.k1911; olt=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=ZAzNvFyv02eGXqMuD54dqlQqiSUPWtM5o8GZ0etXvok=; b=Pe7Bbck5sYO/v8O5tjTvZskbPWwkM7A1aLWa+CMnVCZ/0a1lKloUPaFo4XoyDUE++KUbL7DVDbpmS5MDrooxZoofRw3YQS18Dg/Xbgg+eNiU+FHi+Y6b2VPWJ6HJX+G5WTXtLB5D6wVdQ2cvPuQKhtkySMj5V3GnJ5cNiiVLPPaKjQTtQUeewPE0RWtE3r6s3paVRLS8cSJ6mlWa6fs+q9p1UMtgwbuXb1gw1lwT1N4/5H8pUkGMcR5AsmEyCIGd
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPSA (TLS1.3 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD, johnl@iecc.com) via TCP6; 29 Nov 2019 01:18:45 -0000
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 20:18:45 -0500
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.21.99999.374.1911282015460.79305@ary.qy>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <73256f09-8083-4b36-ad1e-f82f382a0b9c@Canary>
References: <20191128165507.2A60BFDF451@ary.qy> <fb307c7a-348a-03d3-3d8e-8e683cec603d@dougbarton.us> <73256f09-8083-4b36-ad1e-f82f382a0b9c@Canary>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21.99999 (OSX 374 2019-10-27)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/Ah0k5FQLqJJGDDptvfxtDnocB20>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] on private use TLDS
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 29 Nov 2019 01:18:48 -0000

> I do think the semantic meaning of the label is worth thinking about, 
> and I am wary of particular scripts or languages being chosen 
> arbitrarily. ...

Part of Roy's pitch was that the reserved two letter codes like .ZZ are 
equally meaningless in most languages.

> - has the advice to anchor a private namespace in a registered domain in 
> the private namespace really been received and judged to be 
> insufficient? Or has it just not been received? Could such advice be 
> delivered in a more effective way?

How long have wee been telling people to anchor their private namespace on 
a registered name?  It's on the order of a decade, I believe, and it's 
clear that for whatever reason people want something that's easy to type.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email