IETF Logo Mail Archive

[DNSOP] term-bis and was Re: [Ext] Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps

Edward Lewis <edward.lewis@icann.org> Thu, 16 March 2017 21:25 UTC

Return-Path: <edward.lewis@icann.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 E8828129A90 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 14:25:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.202
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, 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 Bfmh3tolguR8 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 14:25:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out.west.pexch112.icann.org (pfe112-ca-1.pexch112.icann.org [64.78.40.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BD2C129A97 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 14:25:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.21) by PMBX112-W1-CA-2.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 14:25:10 -0700
Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org ([64.78.40.21]) by PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG ([64.78.40.21]) with mapi id 15.00.1178.000; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 14:25:09 -0700
From: Edward Lewis <edward.lewis@icann.org>
To: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: term-bis and was Re: [Ext] Re: [DNSOP] WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps
Thread-Index: AQHSnpvJpJiHMrFHD020FOk7fXUSKg==
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 21:25:08 +0000
Message-ID: <A73BEDF2-0B57-4841-844B-039FD11E4E2F@icann.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.1f.0.170216
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [192.0.47.236]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"; boundary="B_3572547908_1987403406"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/MDsIMdgcWsII1o4C4x9zBnorCE0>
Subject: [DNSOP] term-bis and was Re: [Ext] Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps
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: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 21:25:14 -0000

On 3/16/17, 21:26, "DNSOP on behalf of Paul Hoffman" <dnsop-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:

>Please do note that we already have such a discussion (that will go for 
>IETF consensus) active in draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis. We've been 
>asking for feedback on this topic already, and even you gave us some. 
>:-)

I'm not sure if the "you" is directed at me, I did comment, so perhaps.

There's a certain catch-22 [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilemma] in play.  Yes, the DNS needs a definition for Domain Names as the term is used across the documents on the DNS protocol and system.  But there's never been work to define Domain Names beyond the DNS protocol.  The dilemma is that for dns-terminology-bis, not having Domain Name defined would be a serious omission, but the general, "beyond the DNS" definition has never been formalized and documented.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email