IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] draft-schanzen-gns and draft-ietf-dns-alt-tld

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Mon, 01 August 2022 15:30 UTC

Return-Path: <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
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 707D2C157B34 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 08:30:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g3161843hHfv for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 08:30:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:2::4:12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32AA2C14CF15 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 08:30:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 50AED280DA4; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 17:30:04 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 500) id 4AB8B281534; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 17:30:04 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from relay01.prive.nic.fr (unknown [10.1.50.11]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43071280DA4; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 17:30:04 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from b12.nic.fr (b12.tech.ipv6.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:1348:7::86:133]) by relay01.prive.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FA4F60A4790; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 17:30:04 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by b12.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) id F079E3FD16; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 17:29:38 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2022 17:29:38 +0200
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: "Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear)" <rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Message-ID: <YufxYmxz9L8zG9hS@nic.fr>
References: <91abb9ac-9d3b-87bf-5639-174581d625fd@rfc-editor.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <91abb9ac-9d3b-87bf-5639-174581d625fd@rfc-editor.org>
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 11.4
X-Kernel: Linux 5.10.0-16-amd64 x86_64
X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie
Organization: NIC France
X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/
X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.2
X-PMX-Version: 6.4.9.2830568, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2022.8.1.151219, AntiVirus-Engine: 5.92.0, AntiVirus-Data: 2022.7.31.5920001
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/rJqxie1rp2LKMYeaTnjutVnBi8E>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] draft-schanzen-gns and draft-ietf-dns-alt-tld
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 01 Aug 2022 15:30:17 -0000

On Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 02:31:48PM +0200,
 Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear) <rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org> wrote 
 a message of 89 lines which said:

> Whether that means using TLD labels that begin with _ or whether
> that means suffixing them with ".ALT", I leave to you experts to
> sort.  I do agree with Martin that it would be helpful to have some
> registration of names so that conflicts between name spaces can be
> avoided.  This would also encourage formal documentation of those
> projects.

I agree and I think publication of these drafts would be a good idea
(may be with status Experimental since, as Joe Abley said, there is
clearly no IETF consensus). Note that I am skeptical about their use:
most people who "preempt" .eth, .bitcoin, .web3 or .myownprotocol will
not read the RFC and, if they do, won't follow it. But at least we
will be able to say that we tried and we have a solution (and not a
ridiculous one such as "pay ICANN 185 000 US $").

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email