Re: [DNSOP] punctuation follies, I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-alt-tld-15.txt

Michael StJohns <> Mon, 27 June 2022 20:22 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9983FC147930 for <>; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 13:22:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.781
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.781 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.876, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YRv2wi3pgEk6 for <>; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 13:22:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f30]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE1C1C14F739 for <>; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 13:22:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id o43so16859338qvo.4 for <>; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 13:22:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :references:from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=0y9oIUKmxp4ImCmZ/6p3vwP0gR6J8YCN2dVkBl8NLLY=; b=4egyYOMzk9BmhtRPblIFe+WlMwCXmzaJsqC0OqYIDvu4VILOFUgf7fxoe86xy7Vyh3 3a/wJJsQKjKrP4iEiZ2hrhHnAWm53jqJlkmsxR+eEt4x61mOwC9rB5ONfD0j/zX6wW3G aiNCK7tBAP29/hsxqJO/BXcNcFEgyDJ4rCALPZImEyQ5ee0cramXGe5cWanydbNb1fRm 7M6U56YKLi6RsC8DWVxt9Os9VIbt7iY5p0wbumgC//Ado7NjLSNQenQoFmK+OweiE8Hy a5/N6J1ODWd2bMs330mlSo0ZXKavqh6UYmx+5ip3KbGsnGyePZcL5XNGWEYTvJBF2rhp 3Y5w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=0y9oIUKmxp4ImCmZ/6p3vwP0gR6J8YCN2dVkBl8NLLY=; b=YweLLSlt+fNIzxd3UWFRUWgqxup5X+tlcNRrfOni8naFbMUQo4uKGs5z/UJpVITAJg X79igJnb3Vx3aveGpEfHMLtPy+BTcnEDieOj99TVDSMNlxYzFhTSIYdpAtgxkxoYskS1 KFeI+WCgMTbJvB0eqKXiQ2llELtE3uN62tpHdTBYNsGTxtmVf/XmHwgLVIKOUHeMQAfT aHrkbOqaeA9ob+xcpaCHamIqb1QtphNayeMk56i+jrMw6G/K/kewJ2BoJB8iI7OxpwFX QNGrQJM4ZY7up53R+y7D+N7LXyYjQ1ipN9o3nAmKj1ibhMkL0omJsSPMZXId8X3YskqB AU4A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora+srpB2dvJmSKWXlY2dTebEXMcw33FCUKMx8PKQnxzY2jlwvNU/ +t00uHGr4j/jaZrZyoWLpF7Kbq1o4/FaA+Da
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1saKQxTK2knna5NPRsNqICliLS1dha+5n5qW7fI4442pNE+97TRZunWW21NPq18TzMR4ZXRGA==
X-Received: by 2002:a0c:e292:0:b0:470:ab46:c672 with SMTP id r18-20020a0ce292000000b00470ab46c672mr998851qvl.67.1656361364670; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 13:22:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id bv27-20020a05622a0a1b00b0031636caa40bsm1763556qtb.65.2022. for <> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 27 Jun 2022 13:22:43 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2022 16:22:42 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.10.0
Content-Language: en-US
References: <20220627200529.DDB294491C6B@ary.qy>
From: Michael StJohns <>
In-Reply-To: <20220627200529.DDB294491C6B@ary.qy>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] punctuation follies, I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-alt-tld-15.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2022 20:22:47 -0000

On 6/27/2022 4:05 PM, John Levine wrote:
> It appears that Peter Thomassen  <> said:
>> I am proposing to reserve all top-level underscore labels (_*) for special use. Why?
> While I don't think that reserving underscore names will break anything that is
> not already broken, I also don't see what problem it solves.

I suggest that reserving "_*" names is redundant as (I *think* - I 
didn't go looking for the reference?) strings beginning with an 
underscore can only be used in left-most components of a DNS name.

Later, Mike

> Everything you say about *.alt is true, and most people who squat on
> random top level hostnames will continue to do so. But there is a
> great deal of software that expects the names it uses to look like
> hostnames, and won't work with anything else. The argument for *.alt
> is that if ICANN sells another round of vanity TLDs, as seems
> depressingly likely, here's a hostname we promise won't have new name
> collisions.
> Since it is hard to imagine ever adding a name that isn't a hostname
> to the public root, all of the _names are in practice reserved anyway.
> But I don't recall ever seeing anyone squatting on a name that isn't
> a hostname.  This should give us a hint.
> R's,
> John
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list