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

[Mark Andrews <[e-mail]>]

In message <[e-mail]>, "John Levine" writes:
> >The justification for removing home/corp/mail primarily appears to be "becau
> se they showed up
> >'a lot' at the root servers". Without characterizing this a bit better, it s
> eems to me it would
> >be trivial to set up situations to move pretty much any undelegated name to 
> the "Special Names"
> >registry -- just fire up a few thousand zombies to query names in the TLD yo
> u want removed
> >using random source addresses.
> 
> Hmmn.  Is this a serious accusation, or is this just channelling the
> usual domainers whinging about their business plans?  
> 
> Does anyone seriously argue that those domains aren't widely used in
> private networks, and that nominally private DNS names leak all the
> time?
> 
> R's,
> John

I'm not, but name leaking is different to name use.  I suspect "mail"
ends up being qualified whereas "home" and "corp" are actually used as
private tlds.  This difference requires different handling.

-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: [phone]                 INTERNET: [e-mail]