[DNSOP] we already have a new version of this problem

George Michaelson <ggm@algebras.org> Thu, 05 November 2015 01:11 UTC

Return-Path: <ggm@algebras.org>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9398A1B354B for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Nov 2015 17:11:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.278
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.278 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 o5ZPup8vz0Fv for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Nov 2015 17:11:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qg0-x236.google.com (mail-qg0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 901CD1A0143 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Nov 2015 17:11:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by qgbb65 with SMTP id b65so55130579qgb.2 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 04 Nov 2015 17:11:31 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=algebras_org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=ZgOXURk3SfrWSlaWU21IN8P/vhH4dG9iZS/KBdtskhg=; b=1T/8oHlAFcMKnT92+R7LKjK0bojMleCigkblKzK0qUJIm6WYlCawUvnPDxYkxT+xfW VrIpPle2nHv8Re96l5URSH4BrWpoiJjvZUmGQLAin0a/gF/dNNILFOWWopvn0+/CK864 L6M50FwUJBy7M7aaDbla+5joOYbbARHZOKBY46SnoWN4up/wImCeF321HOzy/tGF3XKz BzIXMpcT5TM7ZaClXjAkCw3y3/AIgiL2qBCNPx5KL5sVOMx8sSiJWaHEAfnqq7Di2wqU Xyo0yu9bfGryNpIn8ZA1F4wIDtGgr1+fbda2poxjZMvWc3v9yMZBtzdTirGlEfgQQiS/ dsYQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=ZgOXURk3SfrWSlaWU21IN8P/vhH4dG9iZS/KBdtskhg=; b=Dvpfs9tvr0VTYnqOSjWPepohdAGu5RBrx7zF83TMmETuzJ9pZ6ZVtG+qwi7LfNPwtj gHYunVUUPsUNTv5ts/lFfonk1KQo+wBeMDLZXehMFkPQ+QqgtGH8ljvrnmjXY3wEFI7m dEkFteGq6Al2eTu9jwaAJ/MNPPQiapctvL2e6tPp48dMKCd7ciCZ4CEb0UKHv5Kopajm U+lepUMZehoBZfEqaNSWmOD9nrlguyDZw8OK8xQQ/ZcMXAwt4rl2nGEW990yAD1/9wxs rWaDQ7TxfzyfwkYSOIc4rrw6sXQBfOXnYcsupI4Z5LLD22t4elYDrOhEidAWtw8EdvOJ ADAA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmI146oIO24JeIhqCV1+JFc8epamWM0zCvhaWpL4WzwVnJ/sfQqLNTpbah/IYqL74CqJ97G
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.140.155.75 with SMTP id b72mr526724qhb.29.1446685891742; Wed, 04 Nov 2015 17:11:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.55.80.66 with HTTP; Wed, 4 Nov 2015 17:11:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Originating-IP: [2001:c40:0:3024:69a2:4308:8770:da1c]
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2015 10:11:31 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKr6gn0oiK9WKfN95b=muuxG0+0oKv8KDaq=xpabRf-zgCO+gQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: George Michaelson <ggm@algebras.org>
To: dnsop WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113991eaaddec80523c0ce39"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/gNf4qbRvx-XUYXFPOl83GcAiAm4>
Subject: [DNSOP] we already have a new version of this problem
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Thu, 05 Nov 2015 01:11:34 -0000

So can somebody explain to me what we are meant to do with a possible
emerging homenet desire for .home?

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-cheshire-homenet-dot-home/

because I believe this isn't just the tail of odd requests from the tor
people for various hash based names.. its another WG inside the IETF
process thinking "oh.. .onion worked, so lets go do one"

-G