Re: [DNSOP] Public Suffix List

[Jamie Lokier <[e-mail]>]

Gervase Markham wrote:
> Jamie Lokier wrote:
> > Gervase Markham wrote:
> >>> Wouldn't it be more appropriate for MyBank to _itself_ say the history
> >>> for these sites should be grouped?  E.g. in an HTTP response header,
> >>> or DNS record for mybank.co.uk?
> >> The total amount of effort required for this solution is mind-boggling.
> > 
> > How is it more work for them to publish over DNS or HTTP, than to send
> > you the information to publish, with the associated time lag etc?
> 
> Your solution requires every site to set HTTP response headers, or every
> ISP to contact their customers to get the correct values for the DNS
> records.
>
> My solution involves communicating with a far smaller group.

No, I don't think so.

The information would be published in the ISP's TLD-alike domain, not
the customer's subdomains.  E.g. 'co.uk', not 'mybank.co.uk', assuming
the information is "each domain $WORD.co.uk is independent".

The values are the same information that you are gathering.  The
ISP/NIC (Nominet UK for .co.uk) does not need to contact their
customers for this: it's a .co.uk policy.

> > You've asked for the same thing: for administrators of certain domains
> > to provide you with information about independent or related users of
> > those subdomains.
> 
> But the two plans are talking about two different sets of admins, one
> vastly larger than the other.

See above.

-- Jamie
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[e-mail]
httpsFrom [e-mail]  Tue Jun 10 03:09:33 2008
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
X-Original-To: [e-mail]
Delivered-To: [e-mail]
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0646F3A6980;
	Tue, 10 Jun 2008 03:09:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: [e-mail]
Delivered-To: [e-mail]
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46F663A6986
	for <[e-mail]>; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 03:09:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.266
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.266 tagged_above=-999 required=5
	tests=[AWL=-1.667, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
	by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id Jzv5DKIdy7Kt for <[e-mail]>;
	Tue, 10 Jun 2008 03:09:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail2.shareable.org (mail2.shareable.org [80.68.89.115])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B2593A680B
	for <[e-mail]>; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 03:09:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from jamie by mail2.shareable.org with local (Exim 4.63)
	(envelope-from <[e-mail]>)
	id 1K60mz-0006rz-M4; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 11:09:17 +0100
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 11:09:17 +0100
From: Jamie Lokier <[e-mail]>
To: Gervase Markham <[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
	<[e-mail]>
	<[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
	<[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
	<[e-mail]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
Cc: [e-mail], [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Public Suffix List
X-BeenThere: [e-mail]
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>,
	<mailto:[e-mail]?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/dnsop>
List-Post: <mailto:[e-mail]>
List-Help: <mailto:[e-mail]?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>,
	<mailto:[e-mail]?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]

Gervase Markham wrote:
> Jamie Lokier wrote:
> > Gervase Markham wrote:
> >>> Wouldn't it be more appropriate for MyBank to _itself_ say the history
> >>> for these sites should be grouped?  E.g. in an HTTP response header,
> >>> or DNS record for mybank.co.uk?
> >> The total amount of effort required for this solution is mind-boggling.
> > 
> > How is it more work for them to publish over DNS or HTTP, than to send
> > you the information to publish, with the associated time lag etc?
> 
> Your solution requires every site to set HTTP response headers, or every
> ISP to contact their customers to get the correct values for the DNS
> records.
>
> My solution involves communicating with a far smaller group.

No, I don't think so.

The information would be published in the ISP's TLD-alike domain, not
the customer's subdomains.  E.g. 'co.uk', not 'mybank.co.uk', assuming
the information is "each domain $WORD.co.uk is independent".

The values are the same information that you are gathering.  The
ISP/NIC (Nominet UK for .co.uk) does not need to contact their
customers for this: it's a .co.uk policy.

> > You've asked for the same thing: for administrators of certain domains
> > to provide you with information about independent or related users of
> > those subdomains.
> 
> But the two plans are talking about two different sets of admins, one
> vastly larger than the other.

See above.

-- Jamie
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[e-mail]
https:/://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop


/www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop