Re: [DNSOP] [homenet] WGLC on "redact" and "homenet-dot"

[Ralph Droms <[e-mail]>]

> On Dec 14, 2016, at 4:48 PM, Ray Bellis <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 14/12/2016 21:16, Jim Reid wrote:
> 
>> So what? End users are not expected to see this string, far less care
>> about it, are they? Surely this string is primarily, if not
>> exclusively, for CPE firmware?
> 
> Actually, yes, they are expected to see this thing.
> 
> It would be what would appear in their browser bar, for example, if
> accessing the web UI of various on-net devices or services.

I know the WG has decided that home network device names should be user-friendly, so I'll make something of a moot point..."seeing" isn't the issue, in my opinion.  I see ugly names and URLs in my browser bar all the time.  "typing" is the real issue ... any time a user has to know, remember and reproduce a name for manuaal text entry, user-friendliness is important.

- Ralph

> 
>> Perhaps the way to resolve that is to tackle those misunderstandings
>> and any FUD around them. The self-same issue was discussed ad nauseam
>> ~15 years ago over ENUM.
>> 
>> IMO, the question here for the advocates of a TLD for home networks
>> (for some definition of that term) is “what specifically can you do
>> with .homenet (say) that you can’t do with homenet.arpa (say)?” ie
>> What are the use case(s) and problem statement(s) that need to be
>> addressed? And, as a logical followup, are those issues valid?
> 
> The arguments in favour of a pseudo-TLD are (AFAIK) entirely user
> orientated, and not technical.
> 
> Ray
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop