IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Alternative Special-Use TLD problem statement draft

David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org> Thu, 07 April 2016 12:38 UTC

Return-Path: <drc@virtualized.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 9660012D8B4 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 05:38:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=virtualized-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 nALvZRCGEswU for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 05:38:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x235.google.com (mail-wm0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C61012D873 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 05:38:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x235.google.com with SMTP id n3so102913501wmn.0 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 07 Apr 2016 05:38:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=virtualized-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references :to; bh=w6JmF4rAmU7HQStkkthGHyodtt8mLBeqHFU14DDUe0U=; b=Pf657cRCRAaWcA4U6PmVGRLYm+7fDsNMQKJHFe5eYNm0oc85NrkRFKxAT2nJt7YkYR hccjsAV4BUS+O5l/cuKbwQF7HJUNGp9sDzpzOXP3saVGfMOgxpMYQLBAr4hedrFFQJ60 xmRlTCEajPtgBVORh+ykYoHt5po8x1EiSkW62pxviIYkEpLcoDL+k3he48fMnnRHjSfj NvSGOllDBfq2+wRfgKhYU6F+z2ZBYFmWE+3LZ4bD727hLXChGmAGWBbxj1lKQrbtMe/m Y9KIEjZZkG+yTdKLbWNs8oQDwiTtIVnCTsn+Do+Uqu87WBJzxxoMyfZWemfU/SaKBlHB efbQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=w6JmF4rAmU7HQStkkthGHyodtt8mLBeqHFU14DDUe0U=; b=glKzm7h+oQN+oPnnLcLC0lb0NkQUhXrqvcRfBbzFMb8vyiIs8gB0DPPZrUvz30NILe rq32ZWlfJ9TFNXYkU5edtBHt762QSvm2hR2jCVjMKO2qVc0+I1+7nLQev56KGElDUHim JukNp7rlVAvTtNYjw9BA36WX35csoLedNZztSLYl9zwNItSvN9tGu0iAFa5HVTcHzrQl yiqx/3Py0HgvuH3pH9RtMZF/hXhVQh3h7vX+XVzuioq4c17Ya3vrMvLBoPmavH7iQw9d L7+15UtThNXAkLcPCGdMyBFmVCr73FOPyscRZCK6JtdrL7/f/8hvk0Fr/ElDsp1uBadg ulxQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJKcNgKZPU89jPIUJ7TjbqwlXc8TLaDIPllK3SPnpPjqdGxGymPpoYQqYegxzB8fvA==
X-Received: by 10.28.175.201 with SMTP id y192mr30922312wme.54.1460032711921; Thu, 07 Apr 2016 05:38:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhcp-a2ab.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-a2ab.meeting.ietf.org. [31.133.162.171]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ka7sm8327305wjb.8.2016.04.07.05.38.28 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 07 Apr 2016 05:38:30 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_64AD6DF9-E6DB-426C-B07F-A079C3472B7E"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.6b2
From: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
In-Reply-To: <m1ao7cz-0000DxC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2016 09:38:26 -0300
Message-Id: <2B9797D2-C3DF-471F-9440-26943A744095@virtualized.org>
References: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630797A44227@mbx-03.WIN.NOMINUM.COM> <m1anlSH-0000IqC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <20160406115243.GA14413@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <20160406122131.GA15698@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <m1anp1K-0000CzC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <FE146F00-3663-4042-9E41-ED62D0DB64DA@virtualized.org> <m1ao7cz-0000DxC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
To: Philip Homburg <pch-dnsop@u-1.phicoh.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/To__EdhkOYpjQm07DdAeoc06IlI>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Alternative Special-Use TLD problem statement draft
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Thu, 07 Apr 2016 12:38:36 -0000

Philip,

On Apr 7, 2016, at 7:57 AM, Philip Homburg <pch-dnsop@u-1.phicoh.com> wrote:
> However, having lived through a period where many different naming systems where
> use in parallel and seeing what benefits it brought to have to consider just DNS,
> I think a model where IETF and ICANN actively control the consistency of the
> internet name space is best.

I do not believe IETF or ICANN have that level of control. The Internet is known for "permissionless innovation" for a reason.

> I have created naming systems myself. And there are many reasons to dislike
> DNS and do something different.

Right.

> But ultimately, for the stability of the internet, it is best to not do that.
> Write some experimental code, write a few papers and be done with it. Then,
> if you still care about the problem, work within the IETF to improve DNS.

I believe the point of the special use registry is that these are protocols that are not DNS and have no interest in being in the DNS, but which make use of domain name conventions.  The alternative to the special use registry is not that such names won't exist, rather it is that the names will collide with names in the DNS.

Regards,
-drc
(speaking only for myself)

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email