IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Some distinctions and a request - Have some class?

"Patrik Fältström " <paf@frobbit.se> Sat, 04 July 2015 06:40 UTC

Return-Path: <paf@frobbit.se>
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 9A4A31A8854 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Jul 2015 23:40:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.961
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.961 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 T93G7e5yYYNv for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Jul 2015 23:40:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.frobbit.se (mail.frobbit.se [85.30.129.185]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4843C1A87CE for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 3 Jul 2015 23:40:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.46] (frobbit.cust.teleservice.net [85.30.128.225]) by mail.frobbit.se (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 47EF7201BD; Sat, 4 Jul 2015 08:40:15 +0200 (CEST)
From: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se>
To: manning <bmanning@karoshi.com>
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2015 08:40:14 +0200
Message-ID: <8961B865-A60B-4DBA-A24F-2C559A730748@frobbit.se>
In-Reply-To: <2327C3AE-6317-4808-BECD-FDC66533BA4C@karoshi.com>
References: <6CB05D82CE245B4083BBF3B97E2ED470C27498@ait-pex01mbx01.win.dtu.dk> <D1BAA21E.CA2E%edward.lewis@icann.org> <6CB05D82CE245B4083BBF3B97E2ED470C2759F@ait-pex01mbx01.win.dtu.dk> <6CB05D82CE245B4083BBF3B97E2ED470C275B2@ait-pex01mbx01.win.dtu.dk> <E225C721-7279-4053-97A2-2D63A155DA14@karoshi.com> <6CB05D82CE245B4083BBF3B97E2ED470C27602@ait-pex01mbx01.win.dtu.dk> <88E49F4B-64BD-4832-BD02-D1A882874E92@karoshi.com> <20150702234423.GB23022@mycre.ws> <EBDBDD70-046F-4E31-BDAC-A619EECD4F13@karoshi.com> <20150703012146.GA29948@mycre.ws> <DC13E07F-2203-4FE9-A67F-B5851A54298F@karoshi.com> <986E07DA-B174-4F81-BFB5-F5EAD46C506F@karoshi.com> <CAHw9_iJMZzrCM24gaMJpDNTHbKwF20DeVX7UszCMZuUvGnLaXw@mail.gmail.com> <BB0813DF-DF9D-4CD9-BDB8-26A437146986@karoshi.com> <1A6EA045-998D-487D-821C-D96716756F91@frobbit.se> <23A02478-6E3C-4B59-AEC5-C300A5F9DF40@gmail.com> <B1587D70-D30F-4FD6-AAB7-AC8AAE8FB1DB@karoshi.com> <ED809554-1B64-41E4-99D9-D4A42A953939@frobbit.se> <2327C3AE-6317-4808-BECD-FDC66533BA4C@karoshi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=_MailMate_62A5FCE8-14B9-4572-9E9E-1F06213891F3_="; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.1r5102)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/KUTPSt5TWxEz3wC7bzO99A5PVtQ>
Cc: Robert Edmonds <edmonds@mycre.ws>, dnsop@ietf.org, Suzanne Woolf <suzworldwide@gmail.com>, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Some distinctions and a request - Have some class?
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: <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, 04 Jul 2015 06:40:18 -0000

On 4 Jul 2015, at 1:56, manning wrote:

> So I -think- we are on the same page here, although I would replace your use of the phrase, “name space” with domain.  We have empirical evidence of multiple domains using the same name space.
> (Fred Baker persuaded me that there is a single name space, but we partition/segregate by function/purpose).   The same name space for UUCP, CHAOS, Internet, Onion, etc…  just different domains.

This is why I do NOT want to use the word domain, but name space, and why I suggest discussion must start there.

Because we, as Warren explained, are discussing collision avoidance when there is a risk the same name have multiple use.

   Patrik

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email