Re: [DNSOP] On the call for adoption on Special Use Names (Please! Pretty please, with a cherry on top?!)

Ted Lemon <> Fri, 30 September 2016 21:55 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2775127735 for <>; Fri, 30 Sep 2016 14:55:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.907
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.907 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, PLING_QUERY=0.994, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pIG02xyJHXSm for <>; Fri, 30 Sep 2016 14:55:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0899D126B6D for <>; Fri, 30 Sep 2016 14:55:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id l131so117633888lfl.2 for <>; Fri, 30 Sep 2016 14:54:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=a+xG27/jOyq0A2blm4YBsXOH5EZcmdh7kuMLO6gUXlU=; b=itzVU4aok5DgDUeT3pqLdCbmzJY+3iRWQtb4piXmMNfJMxEGfVqZ9auaD9TSkJe9Up tyboC6v0Psu7XmB/MmVgyIMNxeV96agfyXEOKrI+ErcUeTEoTMXXSFhgGnJOTdEpbrOK go677jXyZwxZz/HA6Hp29Wcsr7Tqra398g4kodrIY+12MRg9f0EFKOaRE3lMy8ATADvW gV+DDNpvAETmicWWM6SpTJgvQ1FZhGvhNR0OxhUFmyAZ0ehfqf4ycGgmxbKX+YKEKmaj BYxyvTdCqHkFCmy5cGUl17SNbx9TzOaX8GQyKPT8omp2FzFT54aYgdokkRXOlgqsytfh ASHg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=a+xG27/jOyq0A2blm4YBsXOH5EZcmdh7kuMLO6gUXlU=; b=bD2wfil+p7G397zcYUHUXJx4FGEXkx6XiOFmKnIaIwLZwDAwb+QaYyu+G3qSVUvzlm 2f6bzudGqhhDYROs45pNlnSD9lPQ5jfsVvuUFP9uJBjU4ggSE4dBxeUTCg5UTk/vubcd 5cI40lb9K2bT9rLqIc21L7Yqp9r50fmRXTgZbbWuKt/uzlFj7nwPWIDUknXSlBYpAuFe KF8hPLiZHOkCHD5oLqVFqlii8QrXYfeJ4BPyXlcqC++eC6jT43eHyvxsWf0IrD8VqIYR uxux+d+7mqS3vS2AOM6ZGbIAuunvPAixQGM1MJW/jnh3PBLdQ1WHERuU4Rm/qMsU9YvA IG6Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RnF8gb3QpP2W7FFJUi/25tR6yJF3kQlQ8d+1M9YAQPWogNIXh1t1/8/SS1+MKcyh4pX3NqwZBMMNij10g==
X-Received: by with SMTP id 201mr912133ljj.0.1475272498139; Fri, 30 Sep 2016 14:54:58 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Fri, 30 Sep 2016 14:54:17 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.OSX.2.11.1609300034300.87822@ary.qy>
References: <alpine.OSX.2.11.1609292041280.86752@ary.qy> <> <> <> <> <> <alpine.OSX.2.11.1609292309340.87490@ary.qy> <> <alpine.OSX.2.11.1609300034300.87822@ary.qy>
From: Ted Lemon <>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 17:54:17 -0400
Message-ID: <>
To: John R Levine <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <>
Cc: dnsop WG <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] On the call for adoption on Special Use Names (Please! Pretty please, with a cherry on top?!)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 21:55:02 -0000

The problem is that you are doing the same thing I was just talking
about: looking at the things you care about, and leaving out
everything else.

It's possible that there simply isn't energy to do this work, in which
case we definitely shouldn't do it.   But what we are trying to do
with our document was to try to break us outside the box of just
looking at this from our various individual perspectives, and instead
look at it from the broader perspective of as complete a set as
possible of the people who have reason to care about this issue.   I
still think this work is worth doing, but I will agree with you that
it does not appear that there are a lot of people on the mailing list
who have any enthusiasm for doing it.

If we were to do it, I really don't see the point in being
parsimonious in our descriptions of the proiblems.   We should be as
concise as possible, of course, but no more concise than that.