Re: [DNSOP] Ed's comment s on Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps

[Suzanne Woolf <[e-mail]>]

> On Feb 16, 2017, at 11:46 AM, Russ Housley <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Ed:
> 
>> #    Special-Use Domain Names [RFC6761] created an IANA registry for
>> #    special-use Domain Names [SDO-IANA-SUDR], defined policies for adding
>> #    to the registry, and made some suggestions about how that policy
>> #    might be implemented.  Since the publication of RFC 6761, the IETF
>> #    has been asked to designate several new special-use Domain Names in
>> #    this registry.  During the evaluation process for these special-use
>> 
>> It would be good to provide a list of requests for new special use names.
>> Especially for a problem statement, this provides a way to estimate the 
>> "size and shape" of the problem and the urgency.
> 
> No matter how you count, the volume will remain small if this is done properly.  However, the special name requests can still be important and urgent.

I also note it’s fairly difficult to estimate. 

At one point DNSOP had been asked to consider several drafts asking for various things (and some asking for more than one name). We didn’t adopt the .home/.corp/.mail draft. The .onion request went to the IESG and eventual acceptance. We adopted the .alt draft because it claimed to solve a significant chunk of the problem, and then parked it pending agreement on what problem we actually have. The HOMENET WG currently has a draft requesting .homenet as both a special use name and a root zone entry.

All of the drafts besides those for .onion, .alt, and .homenet have expired, which tells us nothing about whether or how they might come back. There’s also limited empirical data about what names people are simply appropriating for uses outside of the global public DNS, or how widely used they might be; leaked traffic to large recursors and the root servers is probably a proxy for some of it but how much we don’t know.


Suzanne