Re: [DNSOP] back to: Some distinctions and a request

manning <bmanning@karoshi.com> Thu, 02 July 2015 23:11 UTC

Return-Path: <bmanning@karoshi.com>
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 5D5EB1ACD13 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Jul 2015 16:11:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 y-Vhxz7kYRJx for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Jul 2015 16:11:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vacation.karoshi.com (vacation.karoshi.com [198.32.6.68]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD27D1A710C for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Jul 2015 16:11:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vacation.karoshi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13286A1398E; Thu, 2 Jul 2015 16:11:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at karoshi.com
Received: from vacation.karoshi.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (vacation.karoshi.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ozvfD3BmzHXb; Thu, 2 Jul 2015 16:11:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.32.4.206] (unknown [198.32.4.206]) by vacation.karoshi.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A3F60A13984; Thu, 2 Jul 2015 16:11:04 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
From: manning <bmanning@karoshi.com>
In-Reply-To: <20150702222654.B433F31CAF8C@rock.dv.isc.org>
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2015 16:11:03 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A25CD296-3A19-4E37-A586-9653421983FD@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> <55957632.1090704@redbarn.org> <D1BAFC60.CA8F%edward.lewis@icann.org> <20150702222654.B433F31CAF8C@rock.dv.isc.org>
To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/M1AfGknTIJa3mG4moH3yVhZpgnk>
Cc: Edward Lewis <edward.lewis@icann.org>, Hugo Maxwell Connery <hmco@env.dtu.dk>, "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>, Vixie Paul <paul@redbarn.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] back to: Some distinctions and a request
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: Thu, 02 Jul 2015 23:11:37 -0000

the ^G registration was done prior to RFC 1123 being written.   

I think, this whole discussion (particularly Ed Lewis’s POV about wire formats v. readings from RFC 1034 suggest
reopening the can’o’worms that was/is the IDN debate and 8bit clean, native Unicode, etc.   

Regarding Andrew S. recognition that the horse has left the barn (.local, .onion, etc.)  there are two options open:
1) close the door before others escape and completely pollute the watershed,
2) throw in the towel and give up


manning
bmanning@karoshi.com
PO Box 12317
Marina del Rey, CA 90295
310.322.8102



On 2July2015Thursday, at 15:26, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:

> 
> In message <D1BAFC60.CA8F%edward.lewis@icann.org>, Edward Lewis writes:
>> On 7/2/15, 13:34, "DNSOP on behalf of Paul Vixie" <dnsop-bounces@ietf.org
>> on behalf of paul@redbarn.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> manning wrote:
>>>> ... STRONGLY suggests that =E2=80=9Cdomain-looking-string=E2=80=9D is , in
>> fact, a
>>>> host that is identified using the Internet DNS.
>>> 
>>> i agree with this interpretation, which means, it's the spec itself
>>> that's wrong, not hugo's interpretation of it. the internet people
>>> didn't love .UUCP addresses either but that didn't stop them from working.
>>> 
>>> what the internet should be doing is defining escape mechanisms for
>>> non-internet systems, rather than saying "we are the only thing you can
>>> use".
>> 
>> At the risk of further annoying Andrews ... if there was a definition of
>> domain name in contexts external to the DNS, that would be helpful.  Plus,
>> in each context, what are the escape rules, if needed?
>> 
>> E.g., At one time, some "funny guy" tried to register ctrl-G as a TLD.
>> (He knows who he is.)  How would that be written in a URL?
> 
> In a domain name: \007 (RFC 1034 presentation encoding)
> In a host name: not possible as it is outside the allowable syntax.
> In a url it would depend upon the scheme.  It would not be valid for
> http:, https: or mailto: to start with as all three are restricted to
> using hostnames.  For those schemes where it is valid input %07.
> 
> Mark
> -- 
> Mark Andrews, ISC
> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop