Re: [DNSOP] additional special names Fwd: I-D Action: draft-chapin-additional-reserved-tlds-00.txt

Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> Tue, 04 February 2014 06:43 UTC

Return-Path: <paf@frobbit.se>
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 0C8891A0374 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Feb 2014 22:43:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.786
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.786 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, 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 Fo3ac4yjrdEj for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Feb 2014 22:43:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.frobbit.se (mail.frobbit.se [IPv6:2a02:80:3ffe::176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B3E01A0372 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Feb 2014 22:43:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ix-2.local (s83-179-7-188.cust.tele2.se [83.179.7.188]) by mail.frobbit.se (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A817D20046; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 07:43:39 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <52F08C18.90602@frobbit.se>
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 07:43:36 +0100
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= <paf@frobbit.se>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>, dnsop@ietf.org
References: <20140130004530.C660CE086E0@rock.dv.isc.org> <20140203151958.GA1673@nic.fr> <6BE00F1A-1F8D-4B30-A5C7-10E7466109C2@vpnc.org> <ACF06352-98E5-4368-A8C9-5AB50783C2D3@hopcount.ca> <20140203212333.1259EE44493@rock.dv.isc.org> <CF15D98C.197C0B%jonne.soininen@renesasmobile.com> <CAKr6gn1dpWz3LP9bpA2JebRDSN7GeOW65+Q1tW_dv=9KzgZaCQ@mail.gmail.com> <A6D7CE2E-BF9C-4077-A571-0C455E5DAE1F@nominum.com> <CAKr6gn08xayJCK_GtGNeYbet6tD=GwPJoSYL3tbRXomfxckHWA@mail.gmail.com> <ED2AE016-766D-41DE-A428-DEC49A350E8C@nominum.com> <20140204012148.GE16180@mx1.yitter.info>
In-Reply-To: <20140204012148.GE16180@mx1.yitter.info>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="bb0rBtt34ad1htPKpupqCDrDD9QvF9GAW"
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] additional special names Fwd: I-D Action: draft-chapin-additional-reserved-tlds-00.txt
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 06:43:43 -0000

On 2014-02-04 02:21, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 08:08:59PM -0500, Ted Lemon wrote:
>> > 
>> > purely on the basis that some of us don't like what they did.  We
>> > need a better reason than that, and thus far none has been stated.
> In the particular case of .onion, I'm not sure I agree none has been
> stated.  But let me try again:
> 
>     If you want to use a name in DNS protocol slots, then you need a DNS
>     name.  You didn't get a DNS name, and instead you used a label
>     that wasn't under your control.

I would like to express the situation slightly different, or rather,
this what you describe is one situation. Another situation which I think
is more complicated is when a name is needed that looks like a domain
name, but is never to be used in DNS. The only thing you need is a
string that is not used as a domain name.

So we have (at least):

1. Strings that are used in DNS, allocated as they where intended to be
allocated

2. Strings that are to be used in DNS, with special roots

3. Strings that are to be used in DNS, but only in local environments
(search path, .local etc)

4. Strings that looks like domain names but are never to be used in DNS,
but still needs to be globally unique

5. Strings that looks like domain names but are never to be used in DNS,
that does not need to be globally unique

We know about 1. We say no to 2. We know about 3. What is new is 4 and 5.

   Patrik