Re: [DNSOP] Some distinctions and a request - Have some class?

[manning <[e-mail]>]

Borrowing a snippet from the operational community (h/t Chris Morrow).
If one replaces “subnet” with “domain”… 

——
this is really a form of: "A subnet should contain all things of a
like purpose/use."

that way you don't have to compromise and say: "Well... tcp/443 is OK
for ABC units but deadly for XYZ ones! block to the 6 of 12 XYZ and
permit to all ABC... wait, can you bounce off an ABC and still kill an
XYZ? crap... pwned."

segregation by function/purpose... best bet you can get.
——

So I -think- we are on the same page here, although I would replace your use of the phrase, “name space” with domain.  We have empirical evidence of multiple domains using the same name space.
(Fred Baker persuaded me that there is a single name space, but we partition/segregate by function/purpose).   The same name space for UUCP, CHAOS, Internet, Onion, etc…  just different domains.

manning
[e-mail]
PO Box 12317
Marina del Rey, CA 90295
310.322.8102



On 3July2015Friday, at 14:58, Patrik Fältström <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On 3 Jul 2015, at 20:11, manning wrote:
> 
>> I guess my question here is, what would prevent House Finch Feathers OY from applying for the DNS(IN) string ONION from ICANN because they want that as a TLD in the IN class?
> 
> Nothing, if that is the goal, which I claim it is not.
> 
> The goal is to ensure that portion of the name space, rooted at ONION, is _not_ existing the portion of the name space reachable by the normal DNS. To ensure the name space is properly partitioned.
> 
>  Patrik
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop