Re: [DNSOP] Deprecating infrastructure .INT domains

Bob Bownes -Seiri <> Thu, 11 November 2021 17:19 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E5323A0D4E for <>; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 09:19:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nWaxR1u_lAYW for <>; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 09:19:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF8BD3A0D1B for <>; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 09:19:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id p19so5914135qtw.12 for <>; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 09:19:52 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=y8dS6OLwe/u7uPMdgNlCUtak7W4lcaHxy0lt0GOhtdQ=; b=hpoGEUXupvliPmKGMW8IxFIf701s5jSxhOfCnL+D91NowV2EXbZPCSBnnNLcp/1yS6 Uzb4ethFfpTkZYrRWpi6F980z0lbhHwBR4OzgaxxLIFNEJLQjiQ6VYEaVqyXSffOHA+w pYMHYqEIH3XltUGKA1YHijGydBtXhhc5h6u1tgmH56SqsbvqfNgCkpGZqYjrC6CieY3r n4KQhihTv7qxlEEd/i+HHKwI4ofHjFqId9P1ckS45QDyiJuxMI/9mXKjKp/KBRxaBKHl SBKoI99A0lsM9wPkjWbCCsR0WYO5E3q6WdUUOi7UcmZ8TIF8i2Pp1njKGE8Dt31lOMqd 2BAw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=y8dS6OLwe/u7uPMdgNlCUtak7W4lcaHxy0lt0GOhtdQ=; b=Ff1/cziDC86Lhgjq7f9zx4TBYRBnZmTvhGLyhgtWru9dKP4BznSiiQrxEcJOmDqEgd DxX1DoE8JHwF0N7v3CZHbrGvbGzHVQv8kdao2UVhg0DKVLRa8mW3sgEHFnruet06FLol WZhfb1jp7KHg8uNSTY9W4UlUygQLJZ5a5nXrZ4wUg3BGxS1yIoZo7kxB+Mt5Q1oIL4K1 YsxR+JqholVcX4jjNvHJhLiCQYXw3dLsxOFK9BitqyGqsEPeCoybB6Lr7UJOkP/ieGiv SCYfdm6bqmxN/kcDzcrSmGH4tVtEwAxpIxqc43fMC8j4ObqEwJe/u5STovHxnS/9B+K6 1Z7A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531VmBJv+vBUObh0+yT9OWgyk0qhZnJb5zCcd7OaFWeaGd+3g90H JrOX/mBUQemNIf4DbR/1hUwd
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy/KKAVDdwYtyFxCBXt9vMJneK8JhGJprtSkq1T56S+VK19pyy1KHg2vH7o2btKEfwExHymew==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:13:: with SMTP id x19mr9159783qtw.83.1636651190676; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 09:19:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ([2601:189:4080:7840:95fe:d934:adfb:6d84]) by with ESMTPSA id u15sm1715292qki.99.2021. (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 11 Nov 2021 09:19:50 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Bob Bownes -Seiri <>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2021 12:19:49 -0500
Message-Id: <>
References: <>
Cc: Kim Davies <>,
In-Reply-To: <>
To: Joe Abley <>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (19B74)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Deprecating infrastructure .INT domains
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2021 17:19:58 -0000


I concur with Joe on this. It would be good practice to tidy up these appendages. 

I too would be happy to contribute text as appropriate. 


> On Nov 11, 2021, at 11:56, Joe Abley <> wrote:
> Hi Kim,
> I like the idea of cleaning this up.
> Choosing as an example, I think it would be useful to either update RFC 1706 to make it clear that the advice in section 6 of that document no longer applies, and that no reverse mapping for NSAP is provided in the DNS. I don't think this is a great operational necessity since I imagine the number of people who expect this to work is approximately zero but it seems good to be tidy.
> [I'd suggest reclassifying 1706 to historic but that'd also affect the specification for the NSAP RRType; maybe that's a good idea too, but it seems outside the scope of what you are trying to achieve, and I don't know how we would confirm that it's a good idea.]
> Similar comment for other domains where there's similar existing advice.
> Happy to offer actual text if that seems useful.
> Joe
>> On 11 Nov 2021, at 11:38, Kim Davies <> wrote:
>> Colleagues,
>> I wanted to draw your attention to an Internet Draft we’ve developed,
>> its goal is to formally deprecate a number of historic “.int”
>> domains that were designated for Internet infrastructure purposes
>> decades ago and appear for all intents and purposes obsolete. After some
>> limited consultation on developing the approach so far, it would be
>> useful to get some additional eyes on it so we have greater confidence
>> there is nothing we’ve missed.
>> Datatracker link:
>> It’s a short document, but at its heart we’ve identified the
>> following domains that are referenced in places but seem to be obsolete:
>>  ,,,,,
>> Most of these are not delegated in the int zone any longer, but there
>> are lingering references to them.
>> Thanks in advance for any insight, and apologies if you get this message
>> in duplicate,
>> kim
>> _______________________________________________
>> DNSOP mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list