Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-arends-private-use-tld

Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> Mon, 15 June 2020 18:55 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@redbarn.org>
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 939343A0938 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 11:55:34 -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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 RPQXfuf78gjH for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 11:55:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from family.redbarn.org (family.redbarn.org [24.104.150.213]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1DA03A0926 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 11:55:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from linux-9daj.localnet (dhcp-166.access.rits.tisf.net [24.104.150.166]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (1024 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by family.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 132FEB07D0; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 18:55:29 +0000 (UTC)
From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, dnsop@ietf.org
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, Brian Dickson <brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com>, Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 18:55:29 +0000
Message-ID: <2629924.6WoLTOkaPB@linux-9daj>
Organization: none
In-Reply-To: <CADyWQ+Em0Qh+TeGudz2Zgx4cEd4AUqKf9CcivotKYUZWyKPCPA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAH1iCiouFfMRYoREwhhTbQfnNserw3RVUPs8Pzc8CvNEhysYCw@mail.gmail.com> <20200615174753.225EC1ABFFA1@ary.qy> <CADyWQ+Em0Qh+TeGudz2Zgx4cEd4AUqKf9CcivotKYUZWyKPCPA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/ShVnOooAAcwJ4HQ6_M1Ny-ymFCU>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-arends-private-use-tld
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 18:55:35 -0000

On Monday, 15 June 2020 17:58:42 UTC Tim Wicinski wrote:
> (no hats here)
> 
> ...
> > 
> > The obvious question is if an organization is willing to use
> > example.com.zz, why wouldn't they use zz.example.com with split
> > horizon DNS to keep that subtree on their local network?
> 
> or since domains are cheap, why not buy a new domain, and use that for the
> namespace?

that makes internet viral, and private communications require global 
allocations for no necessary reason. the above quite describes centralization 
for the sake of centralization. nothing should be centralized unless there's 
no other way to do what needs doing.

reserving a corner of the namespace for decentralized operations makes sense.

-- 
Paul