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

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Tue, 21 March 2017 14:09 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
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 F2553127275 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 07:09:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
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 8ZHeQ7M_40T1 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 07:09:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.68]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90C301270FC for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 07:09:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3vnZSc5t9wzCJv; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 15:09:36 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1490105376; bh=zVdfRQYLmOG6XOT3j1OM5nFMlpB4BuDp477AErAHSvY=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=cJrIWn9yLII/rB6w/bDSixtZm+6hlAo5HYs6BqOTLx5x/CqNfpQqYWNLdwoQ/grfc YP9U5+mRmUN2aeJ6/l31G6InsGcbBNGisW7BlKR4FVzTnAAL5nLkqmQCI/FMDtpwdH 6r8zojLeIIb2ecDNx4oszd1q2odqTeh6Br2HY36U=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n2my4cfna0YJ; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 15:09:35 +0100 (CET)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [76.10.157.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 15:09:35 +0100 (CET)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 42EE7353868; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 10:09:34 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 bofh.nohats.ca 42EE7353868
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B4B34144902; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 10:09:34 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 10:09:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com>
cc: IETF dnsop Working Group <dnsop@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <1A714782-2EE5-49F8-A6C0-29852E90DA9C@rfc1035.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.20.999.1703211005500.30281@bofh.nohats.ca>
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>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20.999 (LRH 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/U40Z4tWZ1jNUfiPZ3TwPsRua8C8>
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 14:09:40 -0000

On Tue, 21 Mar 2017, Jim Reid 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.

Can we tell from the queries or a timeline of query quantity if this
is generic .home pollution that predates the homenet protocol suite,
or actually the result the homenet protocol suite being deployed?

Although I fear sticking to .home would be a legal issue, even if it
would be the technical best solution.

Paul