IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] DNS names for local networks - not only home residental networks ...

"Michael H. Warfield" <mhw@wittsend.com> Mon, 04 September 2017 22:17 UTC

Return-Path: <mhw@wittsend.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 57BFE13219B for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Sep 2017 15:17:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.091
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.091 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_TVD_MIME_EPI=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 bd5qlBsvaPNp for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Sep 2017 15:17:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wittsend.com (romulus.wittsend.com [130.205.32.3]) (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 65144132199 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Sep 2017 15:17:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from canyon.ip6.wittsend.com (canyon.ip6.wittsend.com [IPv6:2001:470:8:a48:3e97:eff:fe4d:9bc7]) (authenticated bits=0) by wittsend.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v84MHarx013790 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 4 Sep 2017 18:17:37 -0400
Message-ID: <1504563125.29012.4.camel@WittsEnd.com>
From: "Michael H. Warfield" <mhw@wittsend.com>
Reply-To: mhw@wittsend.com
To: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Cc: "Michael H.Warfield" <mhw@WittsEnd.com>, "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>, "Walter H." <Walter.H@mathemainzel.info>
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2017 18:12:05 -0400
In-Reply-To: <C6EEB652-0EAE-48EE-A0CF-938E0D24862A@dotat.at>
References: <150428805872.6417.9525310755360551475@ietfa.amsl.com> <59A9B760.2060209@mathemainzel.info> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1709012044210.2676@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk> <59A9BCA2.6060008@mathemainzel.info> <20170903043202.GA18082@besserwisser.org> <59AC4E42.9080600@mathemainzel.info> <60304450-DFA3-4982-B01D-CC33C49BDCFC@isc.org> <351E3E93-30AF-4F38-ADE0-178DE402D14F@vpnc.org> <C6EEB652-0EAE-48EE-A0CF-938E0D24862A@dotat.at>
Organization: Thaumaturgy & Speculums Technology
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-ZipFJ/nkd/VaMcGMzU3y"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.24.5 (3.24.5-1.fc26)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-WittsEnd-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-WittsEnd-MailScanner-ID: v84MHarx013790
X-WittsEnd-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-WittsEnd-MailScanner-From: mhw@wittsend.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/g87gOxYmjN33dIhRlH9pGFqNpTY>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] DNS names for local networks - not only home residental networks ...
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Mon, 04 Sep 2017 22:17:58 -0000

On Mon, 2017-09-04 at 20:29 +0100, Tony Finch wrote:
> 
> On 3 Sep 2017, at 22:51, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:
> > On 3 Sep 2017, at 14:38, Mark Andrews wrote:
> > > Why would anyone tell you that “.local” would conflict when you
> > > were supposed
> > > to register a name *before* using it.
> > 
> > Because some vendors gave bad advice in their documentation,
> > particularly in examples.
> > 
> > > If you are doing AD correctly you should be able to register you
> > > machines wherever
> > > they connect to the Internet and that requires a public
> > > registration.
> > 
> > And that is what Microsoft has suggested in all their documentation
> > for many years.

> However, Microsoft did encourage their customers to use .local names
> for Active Directory domains for quite a long time - see for example
> this link to the documentation for Windows Small Business Server
> 2003. It isn't fair to only blame MS customers for choosing .local
> domains.

> https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc747455(v=ws.10).aspx

I would point out an analogous situation with documentation and
addresses.  The documentation that accompanied Sun Microsystems SunOS
and Solaris used examples of IP address 1.1.1.1 and 1.2.3.4 and
similar, now making those blocks toxic since that /8 was assigned to
APNIC.  IIRC, they also used names like .local and .test in some of
their doco.  This isn't just a Microsoft think (and I'm far FAR from a
Microsoft apologist).  Sometimes our tech writers do things they
shouldn't when their crystal ball is cloud and we get stuck with the
results.  And I've dealt with far FAR worse.

> Tony.
> -- 
> f.anthony.n.finch  <dot@dotat.at>  http://dotat.at

Regards,
Mike
-- 
Michael H. Warfield (AI4NB) | (o) +1 706 850-8773 |  mhw@WittsEnd.com
   /\/\|=mhw=|\/\/          | (c) +1 678 463-0932 |  http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/
ARIN whois: ARIN-MHW9       | An optimist believes we live in the best of all
PGP Key: 0xC0EB9675674627FF | possible worlds.  A pessimist is sure of it!

v2.14.0 | Report a Bug | By Email