Re: [DNSOP] Public Suffix List

Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org> Mon, 09 June 2008 16:35 UTC

Return-Path: <dnsop-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: dnsop-archive@optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-dnsop-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 180A528C17F; Mon, 9 Jun 2008 09:35:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DD9A3A6976 for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Jun 2008 09:24:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eZIt4ITUybvY for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Jun 2008 09:24:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail2.shareable.org (mail2.shareable.org [80.68.89.115]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D00C3A69BD for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Jun 2008 09:24:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from jamie by mail2.shareable.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <jamie@shareable.org>) id 1K5kAV-0000nk-45; Mon, 09 Jun 2008 17:24:27 +0100
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 17:24:27 +0100
From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
To: Gervase Markham <gerv@mozilla.org>
Message-ID: <20080609162426.GA2596@shareable.org>
References: <484CFF47.1050106@mozilla.org> <20080609142926.GC83012@commandprompt.com> <484D4191.104@mozilla.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <484D4191.104@mozilla.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:35:31 -0700
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@commandprompt.com>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Public Suffix List
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: dnsop-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dnsop-bounces@ietf.org

Gervase Markham wrote:
> This isn't just about cookies. For example, we would like to group
> together related sites (www.mybank.co.uk, accounts.mybank.co.uk) in
> history. Grouping together all sites in ".co.uk" does not provide for an
> optimum user experience.

Wouldn't it be more appropriate for MyBank to _itself_ say the history
for these sites should be grouped?  E.g. in an HTTP response header,
or DNS record for mybank.co.uk?

Also, wouldn't DNS generally be the appropriate mechanism to say what
grouping relationships there are under $DOMAIN?  After all, the
administrative control for the grouping info which you are maintaining
for *.$DOMAIN, and DNS for *.$DOMAIN, are the same.

-- Jamie
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop