Re: [DNSOP] ALT-TLD and (insecure) delgations.

Suzanne Woolf <suzworldwide@gmail.com> Mon, 06 February 2017 16:12 UTC

Return-Path: <suzworldwide@gmail.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 31B25129EDB for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 08:12:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 Nl7lIXKgcdKT for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 08:12:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt0-x242.google.com (mail-qt0-x242.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::242]) (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 87EAA129ED8 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 08:12:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt0-x242.google.com with SMTP id h53so15402882qth.3 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 06 Feb 2017 08:12:04 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references :to; bh=BNL1wkOxWiNnWvXl5Fi22+gYC6OMc9Kyl1on0yMOWfo=; b=rs8S9/EcIKkScYaMif6i8D0d9mE25bR4eQ2P5jUILcBAt9eaPe/TN6oel/Cx6IJAdD 6HLYaaGxJjfeyBSM4nnTgng9EjmUle2s5waFiMYFWpYLJiNMf4Kh9bZxjxmyWRwHwJ1b ldbHuc0U9FPR0fZhp/dd0GQ+oiNIVaJz/4ge3SNGKteLGcdGA1h7uOSMNmuwY51vWct6 7fApQFtPAazsWXfXyyXFpTttGGBm6CEzDILd6nkqEvFx4nl2O1TqYG6O2SL/Fg/bIqQJ X95GYddcJTtLEd1xYJbVsfEzZPPUliVBO4eDMKRwpCO1dJscW2Q/RSU2hAPeSH69mBXZ v4rw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=BNL1wkOxWiNnWvXl5Fi22+gYC6OMc9Kyl1on0yMOWfo=; b=ESmfZDuVtOJO4OTPqcelz0ZaqXo7TfDCUXQmLxF8Zx8DXA1KzVU8sRat+ljsIBANfk xVj0GLTmyLy6ztH9zS9KubhinMEFu44pGskcU5YUpitxxxRjxq6Q885q0OgUk/6aq5L1 gqyrg2ZDlWAgDfUaX2O2pl9MusPi6ZAVaFQoWCIfamGu46C8/whdP0Vywv0IrbiXXz69 GsYhuRPcuoMRmIgiCqQfmaobxeCPUeqUQDAnZmgUCXOVzdEMUxRUXGtrSuLE7g2mlcUo 7E0wOShgr14Qzpi8IQ0WuF87IHjsqlgVJMDPB+GTCSLgnibvt4t9GccTdGX8Yv6RafDb ibRQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39l8TZG6lijuId+D/NqjjzcrRRIlwUWogvlKb/QrZydrQSYp55pQWQ2wXuBLQ66QBg==
X-Received: by 10.237.53.77 with SMTP id b13mr10634477qte.151.1486397523569; Mon, 06 Feb 2017 08:12:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:181:c381:c20:b01a:2951:5c86:cdc5? ([2601:181:c381:c20:b01a:2951:5c86:cdc5]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r10sm888114qte.1.2017.02.06.08.12.02 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 06 Feb 2017 08:12:02 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_93AE260D-F9F2-4A72-A49C-6564B1827A9B"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
From: Suzanne Woolf <suzworldwide@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <EFFF717C-3A5A-4877-8B40-2D5DF42FD19C@ogud.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2017 11:12:01 -0500
Message-Id: <91527611-CBAE-4DFD-8086-5D6499594108@gmail.com>
References: <6391B5BB-19BD-4717-B9BB-ECD145F7B4F6@fugue.com> <20170206040516.1701.qmail@ary.lan> <CAPt1N1mbzhS19G_uDA8HokVxXuHy5uA7F1c84-1yUUpqZ2ifJQ@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.OSX.2.20.1702052315130.13902@ary.qy> <CAPt1N1m2mowdCF6igU0TN-FCcjas9AaY-uGma4HgPGKx0Jg4Tw@mail.gmail.com> <4E481C14-1C2B-4A18-A4F2-582208C1DDE3@ogud.com> <6B4E9F56-1487-4E09-9245-167C4790AB3D@gmail.com> <EFFF717C-3A5A-4877-8B40-2D5DF42FD19C@ogud.com>
To: Ólafur Gudmundsson <ogud@ogud.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/kNdHezy9U4VN304dwlIvkvGgVGg>
Cc: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>, dnsop@ietf.org, John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] ALT-TLD and (insecure) delgations.
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 06 Feb 2017 16:12:06 -0000

Hi,

Before this goes any further, I’m not sure an incomplete rehashing of the consensus in another WG is a good use of our time.

For now, let’s keep it relevant to the decision this WG has to make, about what to do with .alt and whether it’s important to us to accommodate cases like .homenet. So far, it seems that the .homenet case is much like “locally-served zones”.


thanks,
Suzanne

> On Feb 6, 2017, at 10:57 AM, Ólafur Gudmundsson <ogud@ogud.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Ralph, 
> A WG can come to a consensus on a topic without all information available.
> Now go back and see if reality changes consensus.
> 
> Just my .02 cents.
> 
> 
> Ólafur
> 
> On February 6, 2017 9:52:53 AM CST, Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Feb 6, 2017, at 10:29 AM, Ólafur Gudmundsson <ogud@ogud.com <mailto:ogud@ogud.com>> wrote:
> 
>> Ted,
>> 
>> What RFC are you referring to?
>> 
>> Why do you think .ARPA is for services?
>> It's for infrastructure and homenet wants to join the infrastructure.
>> 
>> It is waste of time arguing if name A or B is better take the one you can get faster.
> 
> The WG has considered the alternatives, and WG consensus is to specify ".homenet"
> 
> - Ralph
> 
>> 
>> Ólafur
>> 
>> 
>> On February 5, 2017 10:22:35 PM CST, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com <mailto:mellon@fugue.com>> wrote:
>> The working group has consensus to give it a try.  We may change our minds of it takes too long, but it seems worth exploring from a process perspective anyway. 
>> 
>> On Feb 5, 2017 11:18 PM, "John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com <mailto:johnl@taugh.com>> wrote:
>> I'm pretty sure I've explained it enough times on this mailing list and in
>> the relevant documents by now. If you don't agree, maybe we should just
>> accept that. If you don't remember the explanation, it's in the homenet
>> naming architecture doc I wrote.
>> 
>> Well, OK, I took another look, and from what I can see, it's a belief that people will find toaster.homenet.arpa harder or more confusing to type than toaster.homenet.
>> 
>> Just out of curiosity, how long is it worth waiting to get .homenet rather than .homenet.arpa?  If it took five more years, which at the current rate seems optimistic, would homenet still be relevant?
>> 
>> R's,
>> John
>> 
>> -- 
>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>> _______________________________________________
>> DNSOP mailing list
>> DNSOP@ietf.org <mailto:DNSOP@ietf.org>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>
> 
> -- 
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop