Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] draft-hardaker-dnsop-private-namespace-options

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org> Wed, 04 November 2020 01:59 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@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 502293A131A for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 17:59:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 BcgZ4jbvFxC9 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 17:59:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ppa4.dc.icann.org (ppa4.dc.icann.org [192.0.46.77]) (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 2FFFA3A131B for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 17:59:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from MBX112-E2-CO-1.pexch112.icann.org (out.mail.icann.org [64.78.33.7]) by ppa4.dc.icann.org (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with ESMTPS id 0A41xZtC001818 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 4 Nov 2020 01:59:35 GMT
Received: from MBX112-W2-CO-1.pexch112.icann.org (10.226.41.128) by MBX112-W2-CO-1.pexch112.icann.org (10.226.41.128) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.659.4; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 17:54:33 -0800
Received: from MBX112-W2-CO-1.pexch112.icann.org ([10.226.41.128]) by MBX112-W2-CO-1.pexch112.icann.org ([10.226.41.128]) with mapi id 15.02.0659.007; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 17:54:33 -0800
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
To: Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
CC: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Ext] [DNSOP] draft-hardaker-dnsop-private-namespace-options
Thread-Index: AQHWsk1xZAZlvsW/1E2IozFp9SPHqg==
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 01:54:33 +0000
Message-ID: <3B9DFEBA-31D2-48A5-B094-FE2BF1216AE2@icann.org>
References: <yblsg9r8jaw.fsf@w7.hardakers.net> <731ACFB4-74AF-442C-A22B-D3FA2FF49DA1@depht.com> <ybl8sbi6i52.fsf@w7.hardakers.net>
In-Reply-To: <ybl8sbi6i52.fsf@w7.hardakers.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.0.32.234]
x-source-routing-agent: Processed
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B985AB17-F316-4B97-921C-1AFDC09AD118"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.312, 18.0.737 definitions=2020-11-03_17:2020-11-03, 2020-11-03 signatures=0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/CNmxcHDjR80AZdBxtPn4GVVMXTI>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] draft-hardaker-dnsop-private-namespace-options
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: Wed, 04 Nov 2020 01:59:45 -0000

On Nov 3, 2020, at 5:11 PM, Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net> wrote:
>> My understanding of an unsigned TLD is that it is delegated in the
>> root zone unsigned. And I take it that GID is simply a synonym for
>> what many call The Public DNS.
> 
> Yep.  It's "Global Internet's DNS (GID)", per the document.
> 
> There are, unfortunately, more than one naming environments.  We've
> known this for years with even /etc/hosts being different from the DNS,
> and NIS coming along later, etc.  Nowdays, there are so many
> split-systems with both internal and externally differing naming sets I
> was trying to use something that included the world "global" to be
> super-clear this is the "big one".

There is "global DNS" from RFC 8499. Or is your GID supposed to be something different?

--Paul Hoffman