Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03

Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> Tue, 21 March 2017 14:01 UTC

Return-Path: <jim@rfc1035.com>
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 425A71298BF for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 07:01:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 LclgVxtfJzlB for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 07:01:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shaun.rfc1035.com (smtp.v6.rfc1035.com [IPv6:2001:4b10:100:7::25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCA4E1298C8 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 07:01:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (shaun.rfc1035.com [93.186.33.42]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shaun.rfc1035.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBBD72421513; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 14:01:04 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.20.999.1703210928390.28925@bofh.nohats.ca>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 14:01:03 +0000
Cc: IETF dnsop Working Group <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <1A714782-2EE5-49F8-A6C0-29852E90DA9C@rfc1035.com>
References: <E07AFAEB-2B84-4610-87E7-94CF32CF3761@fugue.com> <7652B138-FEAB-4138-91FB-D71AFE6BEF2C@vigilsec.com> <6DCFBC9D-666A-4A3C-A418-82BB6AE3D25D@gmail.com> <alpine.LRH.2.20.999.1703210928390.28925@bofh.nohats.ca>
To: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/M_FLkfX4ZnYU1WvkIIwTNDsmXno>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] WG review of draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03
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: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 14:01:08 -0000

> On 21 Mar 2017, at 13:54, Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> wrote:
> 
> Suggesting we postpone .homenet while figuring out a new IETF/ICANN
> process, something that can take years, would basically doom this rename
> and install .home as the defacto standard.

At the risk of pouring petrol on the fire, .home *is* the defacto standard. Queries for this TLD account for ~4% of the 2016 DITL root server traffic. That's more than every delegated TLD except .com and .net. And the traffic for .home has been increasing in both absolute and relative terms in recent years. 3-4 years ago, it was ~3% of the DITL data set.