Re: [DNSOP] Remarks about draft-wkumari-dnsop-internal-00

Suzanne Woolf <> Thu, 07 September 2017 21:20 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89A6A127005 for <>; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 14:20:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oVmFjNqk4F5D for <>; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 14:20:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B4AA132F93 for <>; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 14:20:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id r141so2295754qke.2 for <>; Thu, 07 Sep 2017 14:20:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=pvrNI0Gr8mY3lmE73q+7G5fyrkpxshRCxQvZy4C/6jE=; b=jnYT8CtgOaWPFOWyR1crkZ/UznOO7YasjHk1XmOMfWsPb+4St7eARRVms7hkKTxSFV lWpaE39TjtXtekFLl7pXz7VisZMAHkkyfGePFXkUex4JJB0UHqLfrmSRPTghzuDwQe5r dr6RURsOd7g/NHfPm0HJNme2sJc2FhrB2M8k+OV/zF3tJ2EtkJ+xE6YABi0EwLbms5KW SjGliegdytzx6psuyf24k7YxpI8oLEqGgVMtGgM05L7jzfBGr3/pBc2NStDe22f4PUoz iwUiY6zewueW/7Ub0GKQRxsbrbdi/BU7rnZI7q37Weguta0Uhxi+sWh75e/KrZhEOBYB r6BQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=pvrNI0Gr8mY3lmE73q+7G5fyrkpxshRCxQvZy4C/6jE=; b=HKrKsWruv6NNp+UkxdlE74L8GiErImISuYv4CwHPQvJ4rKiR1adlOFspnaQNlgVRRZ ri6sb2foJHimVTEto+lQFLMN0SsIRD0r88k1xGgYdypWWVaZxykB+Fsf1yrxx+pfMOYF R7zSqG7KaGT3XtB57paDeXxEEWRKtQ3Af8mR4TfkLpk0El/eVzGv5T/FsygvFDst/MqN I63SrMRaASjNxRqx5Q/Ux94Zt+dcJzQj4YodpKJjkBkQNlthI4rRHbxMouyQ3YR3V8p2 DRKQW89qmdrVGbhaqTakNiTAWrJOxZzLNDzm52DeiB4NbZMNCWLwPAB1Mt2mFUIWNTXM AeHg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUiKlSOCdjFXmPocLutVF8/dbZ7Wh+qIxMNd5zG1CdkbzMJEFGGp 0eTnKCj+J9ErfA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QA8Lj4ugiVpv/baAbqgnAJLweK9L8gZ7+hqeeXBASZpPJ5oennUxf7hEqXoifFZ71ufalWMQQ==
X-Received: by with SMTP id z23mr914775qkb.257.1504819221250; Thu, 07 Sep 2017 14:20:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id p7sm191896qke.78.2017. (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 07 Sep 2017 14:20:20 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
From: Suzanne Woolf <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2017 17:20:18 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <>
To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Remarks about draft-wkumari-dnsop-internal-00
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: Thu, 07 Sep 2017 21:20:29 -0000

On Sep 7, 2017, at 10:32 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer <> wrote:

> draft-wkumari-dnsop-internal-00 proposes to reserve .internal for
> RFC1918-like domain names. There is clearly a strong demand for that.
> (There is also a strong demand for happy sex, great food, excellent
> wines and diamong rings, but let's ignore it for the moment).
> The document clearly documents that it will not happen, since it
> requires an entire new process at ICANN.

As WG chair: no reason I know of to assume this. 

As long-time observer of IETF and ICANN process: no reason I know of to assume this; such a request from the IETF, however, would involve the IESG (presumably armed with IETF consensus), the IAB (which manages the IETF liaison relationship with ICANN on behalf of the IETF), and some patience, since it amounts to a request that the ICANN community do work to accommodate a need of the IETF. This doesn't mean it can't be done or even that it won't be done, only that the implications need to be considered as far as possible. 

At the very least, I'd like to see an extremely strong rationale for making such a request; we should be working towards a statement something like "doing this solves the following large class of problems for a really long time, in a demonstrably better way than any of the alternatives."

> Also, it may be a good idea to add an "Internationalization
> considerations" section. If people want a memorable domain name (and
> not, say, the TLD .693268ed5948276cb48c3f3339ac465d, which would work
> as well), it's because it is typable and rememberable), they may want
> it in other languages.

Agreed. This mechanism is intended, at least in part, to accommodate the common desire people seem to have for DNS names to act sort of like natural language objects and not just random strings. It seems to me that defining such a mechanism should consider the likelihood that not everyone who wants to use it will be native speakers of English who are happy to limit the available characters to US-ASCII.