[DNSOP] Whither Registry? was Re: Adoption and Working Group Last Call for draft-appelbaum-dnsop-onion-tld
Edward Lewis <edward.lewis@icann.org> Fri, 05 June 2015 14:46 UTC
Return-Path: <edward.lewis@icann.org>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CC891B303E for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Jun 2015 07:46:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.81
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.81 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 JZxqI0-hdl1S for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Jun 2015 07:46:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out.west.pexch112.icann.org (pfe112-ca-2.pexch112.icann.org [64.78.40.10]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA8831A884C for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Jun 2015 07:46:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.21) by PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org (64.78.40.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1044.25; Fri, 5 Jun 2015 07:46:24 -0700
Received: from PMBX112-W1-CA-1.pexch112.icann.org ([64.78.40.21]) by PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG ([64.78.40.21]) with mapi id 15.00.1044.021; Fri, 5 Jun 2015 07:46:24 -0700
From: Edward Lewis <edward.lewis@icann.org>
To: "dnsop@ietf.org WG" <dnsop@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Whither Registry? was Re: [DNSOP] Adoption and Working Group Last Call for draft-appelbaum-dnsop-onion-tld
Thread-Index: AQHQn55klgRGeO5DYUGACP2HC+ysYg==
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2015 14:46:23 +0000
Message-ID: <D19729BE.BF43%edward.lewis@icann.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.1.150515
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [192.0.47.234]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"; boundary="B_3516345981_2675289"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/trF41KMHvQpe2zdisTLuYzIjCjI>
Subject: [DNSOP] Whither Registry? was Re: Adoption and Working Group Last Call for draft-appelbaum-dnsop-onion-tld
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 05 Jun 2015 14:46:28 -0000
On 6/4/15, 16:07, "ajs@anvilwalrusden.com" <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> wrote: >But if you have to be prepared for identifier >collisions anyway, what use is the registry? This is a good starting point for discussion. I've been passively reading messages without much time to put together a contribution based on my experience. The chief function of a registry, and this is core to all registries, is to map objects to entities. Objects could be domain names, IP address ranges, automobiles, plots of land. Entities can be people, family, organizations, corporations. And the mappings might be for owning, driving, taxation, maintenance, and so on. The mapping is for all purposes 1:1. (I suppose you could list multiple maintainers for a route object, but thats an extension of mapping on to a role account.) The goal is uniqueness of the mapping. The uniqueness may be relative, like there being multiple "743 Evergreen Terraces" in towns named "Springfield." Once within a locale though, the mapping is unique. (Registries also have other functions, but the mapping is what puts the "registry" in "registry".) This is what makes me scratch my head about ".alt". It might be a very useful idea. (Trying to avoid saying "it might not be a bad idea" which has a double negative in it.) It could be a sandbox where "there's no lifeguard." Trying to apply any sort of order in the area is like trying to add some of the features of TCP to UDP - the Internet's version of alchemy. The question I roll in my head is this - "are Internet Identifiers a subset of Domain Names -or- are Domain Names a subset of Internet Identifiers?" I think the the answer to that matters greatly before knowing whether reserving a branch of the Domain Name space for mayhem is useful. If Internet Identifiers are a subset of Domain Names, then declare a branch for mayhem. If it is the other way around, don't subjugate the identifiers under the DNS. As far as the cost - what's often missed is the cost of the lost opportunity to have "www.stadt.alt." be a website. ;)
- [DNSOP] Whither Registry? was Re: Adoption and Wo… Edward Lewis