IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] additional special names Fwd: I-D Action: draft-chapin-additional-reserved-tlds-00.txt

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Wed, 29 January 2014 16:11 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 849EB1A036B for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 08:11:03 -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 fpv5Oh0cgXbV for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 08:10:58 -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 E616D1A02C8 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 08:10:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-1-98-67.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [50.1.98.67]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s0TFoarP045218 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 29 Jan 2014 08:50:37 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: hoffman.proper.com: Host 50-1-98-67.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [50.1.98.67] 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: <97E20887-2B9C-4EAD-826B-043306605F88@fl1ger.de>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 08:10:50 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <72A3E4AE-F116-4496-BADB-5973DEC46598@vpnc.org>
References: <20140129055438.2402.qmail@joyce.lan> <97E20887-2B9C-4EAD-826B-043306605F88@fl1ger.de>
To: Ralf Weber <dns@fl1ger.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
Cc: "dnsop@ietf.org WG" <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] additional special names Fwd: I-D Action: draft-chapin-additional-reserved-tlds-00.txt
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: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 16:11:05 -0000

On Jan 29, 2014, at 7:47 AM, Ralf Weber <dns@fl1ger.de> wrote:

> Where shall this stop?

From my earlier message:

> There is a huge, easily-identifiable difference between adding a token *before* the application process that started in 2012 and then later asking for a hold-back, and adding it *after*.

All names in draft-chapin-additional-reserved-tlds were in widespread use before the application process. If someone wants to start using a new TLD now, they know where to go ask for it.

> I also don't think there are risks in delegation these other than
> the applicants will get lots of traffic.

Others disagree. ICANN has documented many scenarios where there are security problems when what was earlier expected to either get local resolution or an NXDOMAIN starts getting real answers.

--Paul Hoffman

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email