IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] On squatting and draft-grothoff-iesg-special-use-p2p-names

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Mon, 06 January 2014 16:53 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48A951AE0F6 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 08:53:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.347
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.347 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553] autolearn=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 7CVhaIcCuB7a for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 08:53:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AF111AE0F1 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Jan 2014 08:53:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-1-51-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.51.230]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s06GX447085667 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 6 Jan 2014 09:33:05 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: hoffman.proper.com: Host 50-1-51-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.51.230] claimed to be [10.20.30.90]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <20140106160911.GA9632@nic.fr>
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2014 08:53:00 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <402563DA-872E-437D-B561-13E0742A24D9@vpnc.org>
References: <20131231000412.GV4291@mx1.yitter.info> <52C323CE.3090909@grothoff.org> <20131231234421.GA5732@mx1.yitter.info> <52C48A4A.6090303@in.tum.de> <4C051985-6E70-463A-9672-02657842754D@vpnc.org> <52C5DA5C.1090605@grothoff.org> <20140102221823.GF8050@mx1.yitter.info> <20140106084704.GC27479@nic.fr> <20140106154859.GE10080@mx1.yitter.info> <20140106160911.GA9632@nic.fr>
To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] On squatting and draft-grothoff-iesg-special-use-p2p-names
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 06 Jan 2014 16:53:10 -0000

On Jan 6, 2014, at 8:09 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> wrote:

> But I disagree with the method of adding requirments which were not in
> RFC 6761 (which does not talk about the size of the installed base).

It sounds like you're saying that if I create a protocol that is supposed to be only run on LANs that uses a TLD such as .stephane, I should be able to get an RFC 6761 allocation, regardless of how little it is deployed. If so, I disagree strongly. If not (and I hope not), *you* need to talk about size of the installed base.

--Paul Hoffman

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email