Re: [DNSOP] Status of "let localhost be localhost"?

Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> Sat, 12 August 2017 22:10 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@redbarn.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 2D150132408 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Aug 2017 15:10:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-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 jpEo6d10JA6A for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Aug 2017 15:10:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from family.redbarn.org (family.redbarn.org [24.104.150.213]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4DF4132411 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Aug 2017 15:10:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:559:8000:c9:6407:90ff:3eca:80da] (unknown [IPv6:2001:559:8000:c9:6407:90ff:3eca:80da]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by family.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 25DDA61FF3 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Aug 2017 22:10:36 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <598F7CDB.1010804@redbarn.org>
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2017 15:10:35 -0700
From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
User-Agent: Postbox 5.0.16 (Windows/20170718)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
References: <20170812170958.14197.qmail@ary.lan> <B21C539E-75AF-43F1-B6B0-4BDC25C6D670@fugue.com> <4544C6A8-5591-454F-9E94-F3CADD3CDD2D@vpnc.org> <42C048AD-E5BC-4D13-BE26-F9ED5D049FC9@fugue.com>
In-Reply-To: <42C048AD-E5BC-4D13-BE26-F9ED5D049FC9@fugue.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/KH_TQa3m2dvSKHu8KH6IECfzrlY>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Status of "let localhost be localhost"?
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: Sat, 12 Aug 2017 22:10:38 -0000


Ted Lemon wrote:
> ...
>
> To recap, my point is that fixing localhost and then relying on it
> doesn't fail safe, and there is reason not to be confident that
> implementations will conform, because they will appear to work even if
> they don't. ...

i'm only excerpting a small bit of ted's text, so that i can say:

+1

and, please everybody go read the rest if you didn't already.

-- 
P Vixie