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

Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> Tue, 21 March 2017 21:28 UTC

Return-Path: <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
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 8245212951E for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 14:28:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ecs.soton.ac.uk
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 pPOLGZFJpa5E for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 14:28:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87A26126C0F for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 14:28:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v2LLSQpY006180; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 21:28:26 GMT
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk v2LLSQpY006180
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=201304; t=1490131707; bh=A9gUR0D9V2+qZfvubCXGHc6f+4s=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=aNeVogxE2wSJkU/ENyn1ZACnXKJ7SSg/ojXJ7bsNXW03VL7ED4qn7yic+qWoKt77h jyac8C8mw4KTu25S4pmd8O0Z7eq4r8dqQxxFlQIpkJ8dUHizSHw6PLHemLFrw34jvK /P8L8GcRFKwb50CXExrmBmTe3rlGwMV8PTqYOS1I=
Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25d]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) envelope-from <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> with ESMTP (valid=N/A) id y2KLSQ1747617292PJ ret-id none; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 21:28:26 +0000
Received: from 20010a88d51011.ipv6.customer.clara.net (20010a88d51011.ipv6.customer.clara.net [IPv6:2001:a88:d510:1101:98db:ef22:374:518a] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v2LLSJCK028529 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 21 Mar 2017 21:28:21 GMT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
From: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <AEF92A64-911D-4A14-B000-FD54B44B7453@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 21:28:19 +0000
Cc: Suzanne Woolf <suzworldwide@gmail.com>, Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>, IETF dnsop Working Group <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <EMEW3|6ecded6dd3dc7d18b4216ee6be7dd212y2KLSQ03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|1D629532-5ACD-4D8A-AC09-01F0EF5A6A1E@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
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> <1A714782-2EE5-49F8-A6C0-29852E90DA9C@rfc1035.com> <AA7C5D4D-CE9E-41D4-9382-A232D379ACCD@gmail.com> <2D82810E-E92E-498E-99E8-0D9C467559CF@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <EMEW3|f5ec18bf30629ea610ca97cb1b0c9729y2KIYP03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|2D82810E-E92E-498E-99E8-0D9C467559CF@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <AEF92A64-911D-4A14-B000-FD54B44B7453@gmail.com> <1D629532-5ACD-4D8A-AC09-01F0EF5A6A1E@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
X-ECS-MailScanner-SpamScore: sss
X-smtpf-Report: sid=y2KLSQ174761729200; tid=y2KLSQ1747617292PJ; client=relay,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=4:0; fails=0
X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: v2LLSQpY006180
X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/R-gSSwsVB9_zqutGuVIULvX2WwQ>
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 21:28:43 -0000

Hi,

> On 21 Mar 2017, at 18:36, Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Mar 21, 2017, at 2:34 PM, Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 21 Mar 2017, at 17:30, Suzanne Woolf <suzworldwide@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Jim,
>>> 
>>> In the interests of preserving a distinction here that I believe is important: 
>>> 
>>>> On Mar 21, 2017, at 10:01 AM, Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 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.
>>> 
>>> “Lots of queries for .home” doesn’t imply that it’s a “defacto standard” for anything in particular.
>>> 
>>> Is there any evidence connecting the use of the string “.home” in queries to the DNS with any particular protocol, type of equipment, network configuration, or software? 
>> 
>> In the UK, I believe the largest residential ISP has used the .home suffix on millions of its CPEs for several years.
> 
> Do you happen to know how names with the .home suffix are resolved?

Not with BT, so can’t confirm myself.  I’ll ping someone at BT offlist and cc you.

(I’m with an ISP that supported IPv6 some time ago, but BT are now pretty much there…)

Tim

> 
> - Ralph
> 
>> 
>> How much of that leaks is another question.
>> 
>> Tim
>> _______________________________________________
>> DNSOP mailing list
>> DNSOP@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop