IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] On .ZZ

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Fri, 22 November 2019 18:45 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.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 99DA41208DE for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 10:45:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 gTo5ayUYH99N for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 10:45:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk1-x734.google.com (mail-qk1-x734.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::734]) (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 726971208CF for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 10:45:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk1-x734.google.com with SMTP id b188so7204326qkg.1 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 10:45:34 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=xSX35ZEumf0mnQAGM2A73qhRhmqAV+E4OX6DOBKTRuo=; b=MItKuhJNp4Il9LK/vsf4kdbG6WSvp8ZX1wt+ISUTTH14jqLFgV0Sf5zXpQa04p6XV4 4jiaC3D2DUwFlzBIHAm4Qka5SxkyMvowNazsclK/jtPjesbFRR1GAV/W7hrhFRn9e8lI KFzJpqw959EY1pngVvBlZGHZT5/INVB4IZuYKu1WK1Xc+gcuLpO4/mNlkdPpKrknP4tB s5KEX06UcrWID26S71hm9TKeeePkFkBJeeJ/Rj/twHX72q18C/tkVg0mM2N46rUngs/n F4Uy9cHeB+iRqrheZkHVHmBc+YYlKydCZsrXnfzpZyvNqYKWbduARqToqDJ02N95uLUI k+4g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=xSX35ZEumf0mnQAGM2A73qhRhmqAV+E4OX6DOBKTRuo=; b=IuSefpVGGE47iJf9IcOptbjF/IkiQY/RMqMdIJiqSTV+OFX2rfJYMaSM4LxLejB5t2 23huqA/Yu1ohcLneFuSq2pbOrNsLKCpNTb0fIfLQakpM6YswFRe6PFoSDm+dof2M5YQw Nbfhcmrr+lpzcouuibKIq21kk2qis9utE5kyXl9XhrFOebK6bACR+5Kxe46ALfsaeE+C pb6fFeazttLZiA240HatfPw4TlpsIs4ysgv11WGar7+AJYIAT4eEBnYhhGl/LEy7/Vck NIVZLWlkASFOC0lUa8KQCvETrJ6Szy/yypeOZLyiCzL/bqBjB79BXbWgOPKk+0xNCk8f 4AXw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVl4LPsZqAcN7sssNBKJ1r3LRfzF8NUIjKdwTlBipNkG/p6qfTn gcpXofGqeid1xv7nTU10AVf7BZkwlrzdVQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxeeEA+r8H3qEll40NoGPA79dYmED0a+FsYGewSl4tOspKA5R7H0+gnVOLGxhsNdMRinAa9Ww==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:650:: with SMTP id a16mr10027977qka.270.1574448333150; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 10:45:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:18b:300:36ee:582d:1c52:30d3:ab70? ([2601:18b:300:36ee:582d:1c52:30d3:ab70]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r126sm3356485qke.98.2019.11.22.10.45.31 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 22 Nov 2019 10:45:31 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2019 13:45:30 -0500
Message-Id: <29301360-0B20-478F-A891-E25021EE86AC@fugue.com>
References: <3B27AE04-E436-44FA-A9A2-678A505D42F8@virtualized.org>
Cc: Bill Woodcock <woody@pch.net>, dnsop@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <3B27AE04-E436-44FA-A9A2-678A505D42F8@virtualized.org>
To: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (17E177)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/i0QSNpeAcAcg575Kw_B6U6-Lsr8>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] On .ZZ
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 22 Nov 2019 18:45:36 -0000

On Nov 22, 2019, at 1:33 PM, David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org> wrote:
> I don’t understand why one would need to pick ZZ (or any other user defined code) to mean by convention anything.  It doesn’t hurt anything, I just don’t see the point.
> 
> I would turn the question around:
> 
> Why not simply have an RFC that declares the user defined ISO 3166 codes as the RFC 1918-space equivalent for the DNS and be done with it?  If people _really_ want to continue the bike shedding on a particular string, they still can, but the folks who want a string (or strings) that they can use for internal purposes without fear of it being delegated in some future round of new gTLDs can just get on with their lives.

I agree completely.   The RFC that declares this should advise potential users of these TLDs to use a random number to choose one of the available names, so that the likelihood of a collision is at least somewhat lessened in case of a future merger.  Locking it to .ZZ or suggesting that people to pick based on preference creates a higher likelihood of such collisions.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email