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

Joe Abley <> Wed, 29 January 2014 18:12 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AF6E1A029B for <>; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 10:12:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6m5k_eKOFbQP for <>; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 10:12:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::235]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD98B1A0230 for <>; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 10:12:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id j1so5229061iga.2 for <>; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 10:12:08 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=google; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=9tvDl6T7YYorEUGo8o/cFYxKLfvCojev4VE2Cv+dPM8=; b=GN3fX78WXLz4VMiV/DyXo897tkgBBjTn5+IkM9wPFTlnaHl1xt2DO1kLqXdAIdNUz3 b50mM6HsCULt0kOmbAIi25zYIIMrOzoxeHaKzeyVAi20fDoqA4Dnu0YNFL69/ood37Xl i4XSvTbgPHOiG3XZxRjt6Ongf/LIOvDwKwNpM=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references:to; bh=9tvDl6T7YYorEUGo8o/cFYxKLfvCojev4VE2Cv+dPM8=; b=RDeDLYlyU6tWzhO6oLYBVeNUqAhQDdBdOjx7EaPkMSeU7tJUJvK1uySCsX4+PRK0b2 Fb2mlSZ21YJDI1rSwa4GMwyDi8U27mJn37O72Feqs2wnWhZjJcKgHCUm7WRqeBc679+1 Tek3AAMlkPl21Urt3lw0VisDKT9gNrAe86uLs0qk83wVNcK+R2auCwAmO51LI9V51K3V FAqvEhaNM71XeiyeBAlkI+PuEUqgiimocb5gb67aI8Aio/OtL6nUtinKFnbeU56sHarq H9cqCLrEhDMeiqHMaZHOhjYF8kUYDS543lw8tgnN7lQSPKLbM3CyCztsq78L+74iXRlb 1Fsg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnmpBZze26sGsvS4d0OnauCbc6WPZQRgqPZ4nFkneE1DMiA1UcifMtRQ6BiyQS+xF/s7wL9
X-Received: by with SMTP id x2mr30210307igl.39.1391018824553; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 10:07:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id s4sm78796075ige.0.2014. for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 29 Jan 2014 10:07:03 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_7143F834-75DA-48C1-9F9C-07E311B3B9EB"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
From: Joe Abley <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 13:07:01 -0500
Message-Id: <>
References: <20140129055438.2402.qmail@joyce.lan> <> <> <>
To: Ralf Weber <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
Cc: " WG" <>, Paul Hoffman <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] additional special names Fwd: I-D Action: draft-chapin-additional-reserved-tlds-00.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 18:12:17 -0000

On 2014-01-29, at 11:40, Ralf Weber <> wrote:

> On 29 Jan 2014, at 08:10, Paul Hoffman <> wrote:
>>> 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.
> By risks I meant risks to the Internet as a whole.

A risk to the Internet as a whole is that a fragmented namespace (.LAN means something different in John's office than it does at the cafe next door; .HOME meaning something different to the thirty million subscribers of ISP X than it does to others) will restrict communication by name between endpoints on the Internet, and changes the fundamental assumptions on which protocols and applications rely to an extent that is potentially unbounded.

This is the end-to-end principle wearing a DNS t-shirt (the IP t-shirt was all cut up by a hundred million NATs, and is no good when it's cold out).

The trouble here is not recognising that namespace collisions are bad; it's (a) deciding where to draw the line between "bad" and "good enough" and (b) dealing with the political headaches of "use it, measure it, reserve it at the IETF" which costs $0 and "follow the ICANN new gTLD applicant guidebook" which costs substantially more.