MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <8F7C438C-37EA-4C99-96D9-F4B59AFF40B7@rfc1035.com>
References: <147368142586.14471.16897934069436083953.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
 <6ce7ea83-5ccc-aeda-d1e4-f5e5d1ccbf53@gnu.org>
 <CAHw9_iKtmVh8xvwVydWUs-g9t_JiKAF7Frdx_iieSEOvQFHJ1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <f33a6d06-2c17-04fd-d6a7-b73274705c37@gnu.org>
 <74610049-16f1-3210-7f79-8d38d596d641@bellis.me.uk>
 <05DF06B8-AB92-4DD9-B868-1D420FA33692@rfc1035.com>
 <CAHw9_iLGhDXsfPGNb0igLAdMHBbR+giFw067oEReD7Ww84Je-Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <8F7C438C-37EA-4C99-96D9-F4B59AFF40B7@rfc1035.com>
From: william manning <chinese.apricot@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 11:48:42 -0700
Message-ID: <CACfw2hhfhXgf_JBHaFyZCh6SFq+g0-0vVgPrY7gJ-muEg9rSFg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c071c30986ce9053d81b1bd
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/y_FkyySyETROhXmLIKt8hk7NOZ8>
Cc: IETF dnsop WG <dnsop@ietf.org>, Moronic MUA Header Mangling
 <draft-grothoff-iesg-special-use-p2p-names@tools.ietf.org>,
 Ray Bellis <ray@bellis.me.uk>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-alt-tld-05.txt
Precedence: list

--94eb2c071c30986ce9053d81b1bd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I think Jim is on to some thing here.   I suspect part of the problem is
that there is no crisp understanding of what the DNS actually is.  Without
that it is much harder to say what it is not.

/Wm

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> wrote:

>
> > On 27 Sep 2016, at 18:52, Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Meh. I wish the WG could stop the shed-painting on a frankly pointless
> detail and concentrate its efforts on producing a viable problem statemen=
t.
> >
> > .... we have two of them --
>
> Indeed Warren. That=E2=80=99s one too many.
>
> They both come up short as problem statements IMO. I=E2=80=99m struggling=
 to find
> words to succinctly describe what problem the WG is expected to solve -
> sorry about that -- since it appears to be a layer 9+ matter. Both drafts
> seem to be concerned with treating (some of?) the symptoms rather than th=
e
> root cause(s). Excuse the pun.
>
> > ALT doesn't solve any of the major issues, but it *does* create a safe
> > place for those people who want to experiment and build alternate
> > resolution systems -- and takes some of the pressure off while we
> > discuss solutions....
>
> True. But that seems to be putting the cart before the horse. Where=E2=80=
=99s the
> demand from experimenters and why do they need a dedicated TLD for their
> alterate resolution systems? That=E2=80=99s a rhetorical question BTW. An=
swering it
> may well distract the WG from its quest for that one true problem stateme=
nt
> to rule them all. So please don=E2=80=99t do that. :-)
>
> FWIW I=E2=80=99m sceptical about creating .alt as a playpen for experimen=
ts since
> it might undermine efforts to answer the question ICANN asked us, whateve=
r
> that question might be, or be the start of a slippery slope. Maybe a TLD =
is
> needed for experiments. Maybe not. However that=E2=80=99s something to di=
scuss once
> we=E2=80=99ve figured out what has to be done about special* TLDs in gene=
ral. *For
> some as-yet-unclear definition of special.
>
> I think the WG should step back from both drafts, take a deep breath and
> agree a problem statement. Once that=E2=80=99s done, we=E2=80=99ll be in =
a better place to
> decide what to do with both drafts.
>
> Easier said than done I know...
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>

--94eb2c071c30986ce9053d81b1bd
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">I think Jim is on to some thing here. =C2=A0 I suspect par=
t of the problem is that there is no crisp understanding of what the DNS ac=
tually is.=C2=A0 Without that it is much harder to say what it is not.<div>=
<br></div><div>/Wm</div></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"=
gmail_quote">On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Jim Reid <span dir=3D"ltr">&=
lt;<a href=3D"mailto:jim@rfc1035.com" target=3D"_blank">jim@rfc1035.com</a>=
&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0=
 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=3D""><br>
&gt; On 27 Sep 2016, at 18:52, Warren Kumari &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:warren@k=
umari.net">warren@kumari.net</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt; Meh. I wish the WG could stop the shed-painting on a frankly point=
less detail and concentrate its efforts on producing a viable problem state=
ment.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; .... we have two of them --<br>
<br>
</span>Indeed Warren. That=E2=80=99s one too many.<br>
<br>
They both come up short as problem statements IMO. I=E2=80=99m struggling t=
o find words to succinctly describe what problem the WG is expected to solv=
e - sorry about that -- since it appears to be a layer 9+ matter. Both draf=
ts seem to be concerned with treating (some of?) the symptoms rather than t=
he root cause(s). Excuse the pun.<br>
<span class=3D""><br>
&gt; ALT doesn&#39;t solve any of the major issues, but it *does* create a =
safe<br>
&gt; place for those people who want to experiment and build alternate<br>
&gt; resolution systems -- and takes some of the pressure off while we<br>
&gt; discuss solutions....<br>
<br>
</span>True. But that seems to be putting the cart before the horse. Where=
=E2=80=99s the demand from experimenters and why do they need a dedicated T=
LD for their alterate resolution systems? That=E2=80=99s a rhetorical quest=
ion BTW. Answering it may well distract the WG from its quest for that one =
true problem statement to rule them all. So please don=E2=80=99t do that. :=
-)<br>
<br>
FWIW I=E2=80=99m sceptical about creating .alt as a playpen for experiments=
 since it might undermine efforts to answer the question ICANN asked us, wh=
atever that question might be, or be the start of a slippery slope. Maybe a=
 TLD is needed for experiments. Maybe not. However that=E2=80=99s something=
 to discuss once we=E2=80=99ve figured out what has to be done about specia=
l* TLDs in general. *For some as-yet-unclear definition of special.<br>
<br>
I think the WG should step back from both drafts, take a deep breath and ag=
ree a problem statement. Once that=E2=80=99s done, we=E2=80=99ll be in a be=
tter place to decide what to do with both drafts.<br>
<br>
Easier said than done I know...<br>
<div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5">______________________________<wbr>=
_________________<br>
DNSOP mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:DNSOP@ietf.org">DNSOP@ietf.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop" rel=3D"noreferrer" =
target=3D"_blank">https://www.ietf.org/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/dnsop</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>

--94eb2c071c30986ce9053d81b1bd--