Re: [DNSOP] draft-hardaker-dnsop-private-namespace-options

[Wes Hardaker <[e-mail]>]

"Andrew McConachie" <[e-mail]> writes:

> I’m having a hard time understanding the two proposed deployments in
> this document.

It's not as clean as I'd like, certainly.  I was pushing up against the
draft submission deadlines and didn't get all the wording into place.

> In 2.2.1 it states that .internal does not exist in the GID. Yet in
> the Summary section immediately after it states that .internal is an
> unsigned TLD. Which is it?

.internal is an unsigned TLD and is the GID.

I don't see where in 2.2.1 it says that though.

> In 2.2.2 it states that .zz is an unsigned delegation in the GID’s DNS
> root. Yet in the summary section it states that “.zz is a
> special-use-like TLD that MUST never be assigned”. Which is it?

The later.  .zz is not delegated.  Again I'm not sure which sentence
you're referring to though.

[someone did note that one of my section names is incorrect as well and
referred to the wrong one]

> My understanding of an unsigned TLD is that it is delegated in the
> root zone unsigned. And I take it that GID is simply a synonym for
> what many call The Public DNS.

Yep.  It's "Global Internet's DNS (GID)", per the document.

There are, unfortunately, more than one naming environments.  We've
known this for years with even /etc/hosts being different from the DNS,
and NIS coming along later, etc.  Nowdays, there are so many
split-systems with both internal and externally differing naming sets I
was trying to use something that included the world "global" to be
super-clear this is the "big one".
-- 
Wes Hardaker
USC/ISI