Re: [DNSOP] ALT-TLD and (insecure) delgations.

[Ralph Droms <[e-mail]>]

> On Feb 3, 2017, at 9:10 PM, Andrew Sullivan <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 07:59:24PM -0500, Ted Lemon wrote:
>> Mark, I don't think you've actually given an answer to my question.
>> I understood that .ALT was for alternative naming systems, not for
>> DNS locally-served zones.   We simply need to decide whether or not
>> that's true.   I think either answer is fine; we just need to pick
>> one.
> 
> I agree with this.  I will say that, when I first started working on
> this with Warren, it was really for the use-case where people would
> tread on the namespace as a protocol switch -- we wanted a sandbox in
> which things like onion could live.  My memory is that only after that
> did we start thinking of a sort of 1918-style part of the DNS as
> well.  That may have been a mistake, since as this discussion is
> showing the properties of an in-protocol, in-DNS namespace without
> delegations are somewhat different to alternative-protocol uses that
> do not rely on the DNS at all.

Andrew - I have come around to agree that the properties and requirements of non-DNS resolution mechanisms are different from those of DNS resolution that does not use the root zone as a resolution context.  I believe that these properties and requirements cannot be served by the single .alt delegation, so, in my opinion, draft-ietf-dnsop-alt-tld should specify .alt for use of non-DNS resolution mechanisms.

How to proceed with DNS resolution that does not use the root zone as a resolution context is open for discussion.

- Ralph

> 
> Best regards,
> 
> A
> 
> -- 
> Andrew Sullivan
> [e-mail]
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop