Re: [DNSOP] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-sahib-domain-verification-techniques-02.txt

[Paul Wouters <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, 15 Jun 2021, Shumon Huque wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 12:46 PM Tim Wicinski <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>             Yes, Stephane, we were envisioning recommending an underscore label. Of course, that leads to how to avoid collisions in that
>             space, and whether we need to establish a registry of application service names.
> 
> 
> You mean, a different registry than this one
> https://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-parameters/dns-parameters.xhtml#underscored-globally-scoped-dns-node-names
> 
> tim
> 
> 
> Tim - yes, I think this would be a bit different. The above is for IETF defined protocols. This one (if we think it's a good idea) would have to encompass
> arbitrary Internet application services, many that could be proprietary services of companies.

<hat> I am one of the underscored-globally-scoped-dns-node-names Experts

The _underscore registry is "Expert Review" only, meaning it is not only
used for IETF defined protocols. It's only goal is to be a place where
people can register a unique name to avoid name collision between
different protocols/applications using it.

As such, it would be fine for this draft to commend registration there.
It could also start its own _underscore registry.

</hat>

Of course, if people ensure the names they use are somehow linked to
their product of business name, it becomes fairly unique to begin
with, and a registry might not be needed. Like people shouldn't be
using _registration or _website_auth or something generic like that.
My personal preference would be to focus stronger on generating proper
names (and embedded expire / recurring check within the name) that
would ensure no central registry of any kind would be needed.

Paul