IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-arends-private-use-tld

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Sun, 14 June 2020 19:54 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B26E3A1171 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 Jun 2020 12:54:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.851
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.851 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=MsPd5Kv+; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=dGKfW8dg
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 IS2WycWdHvxb for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 Jun 2020 12:54:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A7FE83A116F for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sun, 14 Jun 2020 12:54:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 71038 invoked from network); 14 Jun 2020 19:54:18 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=1157a.5ee6806a.k2006; bh=vD+9ZY1sN9nOyKsFDemMfRelmGuN1cxj5C92FGZPKrU=; b=MsPd5Kv+3PazhRv42/OLpoKENI6Rvl3rFgPRT087LRyuvk9Xa38E6MtexkM28AX4wYwEkwTmVGBbbh4PUfWpg4TlPpZ+AgkReBgVZjVdFlHTaNz92lw9iI2mTpysBJL9jLkMvkCZFbc3nJzkQpebObWyfmFZ7M4Lt8EisMxK3wb+HwPUbDeNOZv7dml2NSjYAFcFtcSkGKzpInGDwMKLYl6ETxqxV65i3lBUlPrA2wqch2cNNm74qf/vUa9Y0XUa
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=1157a.5ee6806a.k2006; bh=vD+9ZY1sN9nOyKsFDemMfRelmGuN1cxj5C92FGZPKrU=; b=dGKfW8dgoTzMuVkFlLtRqACTOwrTdSWz9oEFzSJgzsuUrpWRFlCl6tu2uC/ZnCWKZWOpE2RvEyhXiZFRIw+d5rjzu2l/1t0zv/WR1xn0J+yxUQUberkd5ZWV1iJ+eIXLtk+7/HCepgeX1P9aH3t8AV6JaJXdyu1X/kRL76na4HevaN9FHZCNwdPGSpL6PjryCdd9YKWc16zGrFMB5RGC4eMocaU1Gds5FHCNSvTF9xfJyi60RdZqN3eerZBMYU2d
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTP via TCP6; 14 Jun 2020 19:54:17 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id AF9D01AB8AAA; Sun, 14 Jun 2020 15:54:17 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2020 15:54:17 -0400
Message-Id: <20200614195417.AF9D01AB8AAA@ary.qy>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Cc: rubensk@nic.br
In-Reply-To: <29A6A711-3641-4E9B-BF07-8D9E66056BCB@nic.br>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/bNMLk7u99vzTFwBo2lgEAm6RLgQ>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-arends-private-use-tld
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Sun, 14 Jun 2020 19:54:22 -0000

In article <29A6A711-3641-4E9B-BF07-8D9E66056BCB@nic.br> you write:
>
>I wonder what would have happened if this RFC was available a time before IDNs were defined, someone
>decided to use .xn and assume xn was only an internal use thing.

I suppose we would find out how much broken software looked for "xn"
rather than "xn--". I would be surprised if there were a lot of it.
Have you ever run into anything that mishandles xn.examp1e.com ?

Don't forget that RFC 5890 reserved all labels of the form
XX--anything for any XX as R-LDH labels, even though currently only
XN--anything is interpreted specially.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email