Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-wkumari-dnsop-alt-tld-00.txt

Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com> Wed, 12 February 2014 20:24 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
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 4BF261A06B2 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 12:24:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.448
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.448 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548] autolearn=ham
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 UaCRgl-knHlG for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 12:24:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com (shell-too.nominum.com [64.89.228.229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 882E61A06BE for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 12:24:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5476E1B832C for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 10:40:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-02.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26650190052; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 10:40:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.43.232] (192.168.1.10) by CAS-02.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 10:40:13 -0800
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
From: Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <00BDA580-984F-41D1-8659-04278737A526@hopcount.ca>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 13:40:09 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <982167BD-10FC-4D06-9E85-47F371BBCA90@nominum.com>
References: <20140210205838.15973.63281.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <E63B37B9-EFA0-43A5-9AC5-81CEC23C342C@viagenie.ca> <00BDA580-984F-41D1-8659-04278737A526@hopcount.ca>
To: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
X-Originating-IP: [192.168.1.10]
Cc: Marc Blanchet <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, draft-wkumari-dnsop-alt-tld@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-wkumari-dnsop-alt-tld-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, 12 Feb 2014 20:24:41 -0000

On Feb 12, 2014, at 1:24 PM, Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>; wrote:
> I suspect that there would be fewer roadblocks involved in choosing an anchor ALT.ARPA than ALT, since ARPA is under the control of an IETF family member while the root is controlled by distant cousins. If I'm right that this proposal is for future, as-yet-unknown applications, then the choice of anchor should be arbitrary; it feels in that case like the path of least resistance is the right one.

It really shouldn't be difficult to make this work, although if .ALT is already spoken for a different name might be needed.   If it is in fact difficult, then RFC 6761 is pretty pointless.

I agree with your other point, though—this may be useful for future efforts, but doesn't address the same problem as the other two documents we've talked about.