IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Interim DNSOP WG meeting on Special Use Names: some reading material

David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org> Thu, 14 May 2015 15:26 UTC

Return-Path: <drc@virtualized.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 0C5181A6EED for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 May 2015 08:26:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 gxd7cWkSZo8P for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 May 2015 08:26:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pd0-f181.google.com (mail-pd0-f181.google.com [209.85.192.181]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 520E41A1EF7 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 May 2015 08:26:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pdea3 with SMTP id a3so90318891pde.3 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 May 2015 08:26:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:mime-version:content-type:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references:to; bh=XyrgCkU0cJyr/Q/wVOkVR2l7HETdlIpTob+wSj40C24=; b=cWnzSXhBABiHAB+uk0QsYw5/ZJj36JzDTg5pLtzDXCasVA7/YhK0s5eFC7Tp2woRmQ GXNClZBXOIfygvzomY2JfxG6Z62gC+8YoOUAM0aMuB6S5Vno0IoSr9ATuj8FoTeXX4TP m00i5p23DlwA/Kw+D5cL16gDfD+flIq35qDoQCD4TQr73vjHGg+503fQgJC3Xux5etzc 2cnjLXUbYmTYqAg5N7dLJSCnPmbkwPfY4P4k1aBnSxz+Pu2KYFxpuNvrtI1YH7YNY5V4 fTvLjrYHdbJiOZuRqeJ+e6IqJaO4txhi5eMrvHswiAQqBIeaMSTh2dsOKC437P3/D+/J /PKQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnlAr481R25epzshFl4b0JtqKCUzqV6G4fpNNeE6tsZ4CfToRNmohxmFg5jqFXAH4DJAd8k
X-Received: by 10.70.98.145 with SMTP id ei17mr9362576pdb.92.1431617167968; Thu, 14 May 2015 08:26:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.0.5] (c-50-184-24-209.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [50.184.24.209]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ht10sm22748317pdb.41.2015.05.14.08.26.06 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 14 May 2015 08:26:07 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D4D6A098-E81E-4B06-9C9C-9A5E58BA139D"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5b6
From: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
In-Reply-To: <22BEFF07-F54F-4BC5-9396-44A1DB1BF480@nominum.com>
Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 08:26:05 -0700
Message-Id: <DBCA4F56-CBB3-4D12-A007-203EC1A7161E@virtualized.org>
References: <20150513205135.14395.qmail@ary.lan> <7AD02DF7-45A5-42CE-AAE2-50CCAE3B6A4F@virtualized.org> <0EC766DD-E56D-4E6F-80D7-8B26BC87A528@INTERISLE.NET> <5E25D193-A5A4-46FC-A724-A4125585CAD8@virtualized.org> <CAKr6gn2cC275w1O3vSMBc0k6ZDZvbofx47GqPXc4wXJwdwY_4w@mail.gmail.com> <7D84AC1B-2782-4CC1-81D8-279F45125FEC@nominum.com> <CAKr6gn0rbvWXfjrgwocFb73jVutNyRQfG8dSfo7o6Q04cYOvNw@mail.gmail.com> <22BEFF07-F54F-4BC5-9396-44A1DB1BF480@nominum.com>
To: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2098)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/xzSGdXLPbOYveymgzdYSd5VatbE>
Cc: dnsop WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Interim DNSOP WG meeting on Special Use Names: some reading material
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: Thu, 14 May 2015 15:26:13 -0000

Ted,

> But in the case of .onion, .corp and .home, we _do_ have such a reason.

Great!  What is that reason so it can be encoded into an RFC, can be measured, and there can be an objective evaluation as to whether a prospective name can be placed into the Special Use Names registry?

Thanks,
-drc

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email