IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] [internet-drafts@ietf.org: I-D Action: draft-grothoff-iesg-special-use-p2p-names-00.txt]

David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org> Thu, 05 December 2013 18:37 UTC

Return-Path: <drc@virtualized.org>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EC071AD7BF for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Dec 2013 10:37:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 wDf0G6Dyanop for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Dec 2013 10:37:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alpha.virtualized.org (alpha.virtualized.org [199.233.229.186]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B41E1AD66E for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Dec 2013 10:37:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpha.virtualized.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C006C84CEF; Thu, 5 Dec 2013 13:36:58 -0500 (EST)
Received: from alpha.virtualized.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (alpha.virtualized.org [127.0.0.1]) (maiad, port 10024) with ESMTP id 12372-08; Thu, 5 Dec 2013 13:36:58 -0500 (EST)
Received: from [10.0.1.6] (c-24-4-109-25.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.4.109.25]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: drc@virtualized.org) by alpha.virtualized.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B0A59848F1; Thu, 5 Dec 2013 13:36:57 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_59AA0DDF-B3A1-46D6-9541-8DA0AB6F5C18"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1822\))
From: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
In-Reply-To: <20131205084044.GB5215@nic.fr>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 10:36:53 -0800
Message-Id: <98F4DF09-2C6C-4FE2-A020-D6CDD2741739@virtualized.org>
References: <20131202151651.GD16808@mx1.yitter.info> <A12FD3E0-58F6-4490-877F-A9C59405F717@vpnc.org> <6DBBC8339C394DBDAE4FE1F764E02A8D@hopcount.ca> <20131203170825.GA17211@nic.fr> <21D03162-81D1-494A-89A9-41BE89D28A0E@nominum.com> <BB7627E9-8D50-48E5-B809-64AE4D574271@virtualized.org> <20131203221006.GB5689@sources.org> <D3E446D0-F9ED-4671-A1C2-29A15D3DE010@virtualized.org> <alpine.LSU.2.00.1312041229560.8824@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk> <6A3B7F5A-238C-45BC-AFF9-38F3213A7322@virtualized.org> <20131205084044.GB5215@nic.fr>
To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1822)
Cc: dnsop WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [internet-drafts@ietf.org: I-D Action: draft-grothoff-iesg-special-use-p2p-names-00.txt]
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 05 Dec 2013 18:37:07 -0000

On Dec 5, 2013, at 12:40 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> wrote:
>> If he doesn't have the .onion
>> overlay software installed and configured, he's likely to be
>> disappointed/confused/angry 
> But it is the same problem with <http://lolcats.local/>.

You carefully edited out the parenthetical immediately following "angry"

>> (at least with .local if my PHB is an English speaker, he might have a hint)

Yes, it's the same problem, but it is (currently) limited to essentially one TLD and one which has some (English-only) suggestion about its implications.

> Or, for the
> matter, for <http://192.168.1.1/>. It seems you're restarting old
> wars.

In the sense that I'm resurrecting the same arguments used whenever the latest VC comes up with the brilliant idea of alternative roots, I suppose you could say I'm continuing a war.

With the proliferation of new TLDs, how is anyone supposed to know if a TLD is a real TLD and not some pseudo-domain that looks like a TLD but isn't really and they need some cool and nifty plugin or software package to actually make use of the name?

Regards,
-drc

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email