Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03
Matthew Pounsett <matt@conundrum.com> Thu, 23 March 2017 14:06 UTC
Return-Path: <matt@conundrum.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 91A6E1267BB for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 07:06:15 -0700 (PDT)
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, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=conundrum-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 AK44nwiPP5oR for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 07:06:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ua0-x233.google.com (mail-ua0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c08::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 538F7124BFA for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 07:06:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ua0-x233.google.com with SMTP id q7so94408536uaf.2 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 07:06:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=conundrum-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=BBdEt64Z0xUJB+WBhNtfP0cO8KE1nsUauD7bhSpRpuc=; b=fyrdJgOJOzdpTd8Lknt8Lyv7h5kcAcknbFTbJvxSEy+s9oyuEzvc49MEZ3cBWA/tcw o7B48UP98eVl3X5+Gw0FuEGCu33AcBawhNzjRGK8LHEV+ziwyQ1Ge0IErMTA8VfwSQGb pBAXy1GYEE9wpLPkikNfmYRR6BBrWVOu+gFx7d2ASbtjGO15mQWkw9DF9QwqxGBngqy4 I6TyPPMq/j2nnQpbZ/AqfnqGMjZIeyr/J+3GpUqVa3G5CRXaPP0vvrzejjnQ7O1de5P1 zQ+fRQKK5+ZzEtXLA7W2LI0EA/WIM91dHCMEkKGmnf2iA//Gxt0pk5RNmxLd9FaV//xb +qsA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=BBdEt64Z0xUJB+WBhNtfP0cO8KE1nsUauD7bhSpRpuc=; b=KDQrQQdAfoSwzJfyhvUkyz+I4i70XRQ/3PCUMGzCr6StD4wu5xCeLzuJKR9HjEgeqQ WBt3E+xewqCsRgeinR+kgl0pvA9kVpNNrnOfc1xgSsn1rBi02+Eno8otHrbL15r/Xean Hhz4LSfFfrSofb87dXBlDC02hEaDvd2/9kdptH5pXYC3tHeWNv7438sF5IOyuW19qWF6 1Qvf5qDE3F6HK4HYIqZH5mZLkmtcbEClq2vWGC3+dHmEDzph3SBHLXnVPoXvVS6SNu1G 6d3JZvrWWvEn5HEjiMS/guybMB6vdFF7Ss3d0uQFpo7jzIDNCmmRt/Zjcwqn7wKIvPyz Zdzg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H2+I5GFUO31YhdIJfewCxiFNUJupgmU/qZ9TpcNEw2z9m/Yau0aHaOvjbRdREsUoLZymli0pYr9aGgbTg==
X-Received: by 10.176.82.130 with SMTP id v2mr1297983uav.62.1490277971561; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 07:06:11 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.103.50.65 with HTTP; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 07:06:10 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1E14B142-680B-4E30-809B-68E03EB6E326@gmail.com>
References: <1E14B142-680B-4E30-809B-68E03EB6E326@gmail.com>
From: Matthew Pounsett <matt@conundrum.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 10:06:10 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAiTEH-cn-i+mLPh6w0hSNEPtjA3fM3u9re_S4Rptm7sUC9D6w@mail.gmail.com>
To: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c18fe0c1cfde3054b666198"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/F9dKMItW7EOo64cAIsD_ZAFL-ik>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 14:06:15 -0000
On 19 March 2017 at 21:44, Suzanne Woolf <suzworldwide@gmail.com> wrote: > This document is the product of the homenet WG, which has asked the IESG > to approve it for publication, so our comments are strictly advisory to the > IESG. There was some discussion of the draft on this list shortly after it > appeared, in November 2016, but it’s always the AD’s prerogative to ask for > additional review. > > To first answer the two questions in the call for reviews: I see no technical problems either with the RFC6761 application in the draft, or with having an unsecured delegation in the root zone, should 'homenet.' be chosen to anchor HNCP names. There's a clear technical need for special handling at the border between the local network and the Internet (local names) and–in the absence of a specification for getting local trust anchors into every validating resolver inside the local network–an unsecured delegation for whatever name is chosen to facilitate end-to-end security. The reason we have a problem here is that this has been gone about in entirely the wrong order, and procedurally leaves the IETF in a difficult position. We have no business demanding a root zone delegation from ICANN, and publishing an RFC that requires that to happen in order to be useful is tantamount to making that demand, regardless of how nicely the demand is worded. The need to correct the mistakes of the HNCP draft has, I think, resulted in a rush that has been detrimental to careful consideration. At the risk of repeating the obvious, so that I can refer back to this list, what should have been done is: 1) speak to ICANN (the community) about whether/how it's possible for IETF to reserve & delegate an unsecured name from the root 2) if the community says yes, and after a process is defined, pick a name that doesn't conflict with anything (including DITL research) 3) write the draft to reserve the name While I appreciate that there's some risk this name might be exposed to end users, and that perhaps some tiny percentage of end users might react badly to seeing a reference to ARPA, I think that exposure is mostly going to happen with technology professionals and hobbyists (power users), not the typical home user. So while it still may be preferable to use homenet. over homenet.arpa., I'm unconvinced that it *needs* to be that way. If HOMENET is set on trying for homenet., then I would recommend proceeding with draft-ietf-homenet-redact, and shelving this draft until (1) and (2) can be completed. If there's a need that draft-ietf-homenet-dot be finalized before (1) and (2) can happen, then homenet. should be replaced with homenet.arpa.. - Matt PS: given that there is already talk of lawsuits over home. and corp., and given that for any name that might be chosen there's likely somebody out there in the world that thinks that name might be valuable to register, I think the chances of getting a 'yes' out of the ICANN community is very nearly zero.
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Paul Hoffman
- [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Suzanne Woolf
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 George Michaelson
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Russ Housley
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Russ Housley
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Jim Reid
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Russ Housley
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Ralph Droms
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Paul Vixie
- [DNSOP] Fwd: WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-… Russ Housley
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Russ Housley
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Steve Crocker
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Steve Crocker
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Brian Dickson
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Brian Dickson
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Steve Crocker
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Brian Dickson
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Paul Vixie
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Mark Andrews
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Mark Andrews
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Mark Andrews
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Suzanne Woolf
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Philip Homburg
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Ralph Droms
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Ralph Droms
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Jim Reid
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Philip Homburg
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Ralph Droms
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Ralph Droms
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Jim Reid
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Suzanne Woolf
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Jaap Akkerhuis
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Suzanne Woolf
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Mark Andrews
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Jim Reid
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Suzanne Woolf
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Tim Chown
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Ray Bellis
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Ralph Droms
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Tim Chown
- [DNSOP] .arpa Jim Reid
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Patrik Fältström
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Suzanne Woolf
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Tim Chown
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Tim Chown
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Tim Chown
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ray Bellis
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ralph Droms
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa John Levine
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa John R Levine
- Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 Matthew Pounsett
- [DNSOP] draft-ietf-homenet-dot review limits Re: … Suzanne Woolf
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Suzanne Woolf
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ray Bellis
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ralph Droms
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Suzanne Woolf
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ray Bellis
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ray Bellis
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ralph Droms
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Matthew Pounsett
- [DNSOP] Homenet implementation plans by vendors? … Dan York
- Re: [DNSOP] Homenet implementation plans by vendo… Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] Homenet implementation plans by vendo… Ray Bellis
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Matt Larson
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ralph Droms
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] Homenet implementation plans by vendo… George Michaelson
- Re: [DNSOP] Homenet implementation plans by vendo… Ray Bellis
- Re: [DNSOP] Homenet implementation plans by vendo… George Michaelson
- Re: [DNSOP] Homenet implementation plans by vendo… Ray Bellis
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ralph Droms
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ozgur Karatas
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Suzanne Woolf
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa John Levine
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Richard Lamb
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa George Michaelson
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa David Conrad
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa George Michaelson
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa George Michaelson
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa George Michaelson
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ted Lemon
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Patrik Fältström
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Ray Bellis
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Patrik Fältström
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Jim Reid
- Re: [DNSOP] .arpa Suzanne Woolf