Re: [DNSOP] .arpa

"Patrik Fältström " <> Wed, 22 March 2017 08:12 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26DC71314FB for <>; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 01:12:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.602
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KfacX-Se4dYr for <>; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 01:12:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 219A413149F for <>; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 01:12:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3EA7E200DE; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 09:11:57 +0100 (CET)
From: "Patrik =?utf-8?b?RsOkbHRzdHLDtm0=?=" <>
To: "Jim Reid" <>
Cc: "Suzanne Woolf" <>, "IETF dnsop Working Group" <>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 09:11:57 +0100
Message-ID: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=_MailMate_F7A85DAD-96AA-460D-B37C-EEFF7CBE2564_="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Mailer: MailMate (2.0BETAr6080)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] .arpa
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 08:12:23 -0000

On 22 Mar 2017, at 8:05, Jim Reid wrote:

>> On 21 Mar 2017, at 14:53, Suzanne Woolf <> wrote:
>> RFC 3172 was written in 2001…
> RFC 3172 was an attempt to rewrite history and contrive an acronym: Address and Routing Parameter Area - really?
>> Respectfully, I’ve always wondered who has this problem (US or non-US) besides network infrastructure geeks Of a Certain Age (yes, including myself, and many IETF participants).
> It's a convenient tool for those hostile to USG "control" of the Internet: ie the US military is responsible for everything under .arpa, the US military's ARPA has still got some special status in the operation/development/control of the Internet, etc, etc. [And say things like "if .arpa isn't for US military control, why can't the string be changed?" or ".arpa hasn't been renamed since the Internet started 25-30 years ago. That proves ARPA/DoD is in charge of the Internet.".] It's utter nonsense of course. But that doesn't stop government officials and policymakers from making these arguments. I have seen them do this many times. Sigh. RFC3172 didn't make things better.

The important thing in RFC3172 is Appendix A, the letter by which US Government (via Karen Rose), that was then in charge, set the scope for the IANA and use of .ARPA.

The next big step was the end of the contract(s) between US Gov and ICANN Oct 1 2016.

Many steps of course remain, but it is important to separate facts from rumors, while at the same time not ignore the need for proper and correct information and informed discussions.