Re: [DNSOP] draft-liman-tld-names-04

Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> Mon, 29 November 2010 16:17 UTC

Return-Path: <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 853BD3A6C1D for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 08:17:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.566
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.566 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.033, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5Jvq4GY4hXCR for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 08:17:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ppsw-41.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-41.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.141]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 671013A6BCC for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 08:17:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found
X-Cam-SpamDetails: not scanned
X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/
Received: from hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.54]:55229) by ppsw-41.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.156]:25) with esmtpa (EXTERNAL:fanf2) id 1PN6RO-0005lV-SH (Exim 4.72) (return-path <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>); Mon, 29 Nov 2010 16:18:58 +0000
Received: from fanf2 (helo=localhost) by hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk (hermes.cam.ac.uk) with local-esmtp id 1PN6RO-0005YT-OB (Exim 4.67) (return-path <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>); Mon, 29 Nov 2010 16:18:58 +0000
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 16:18:58 +0000
From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
X-X-Sender: fanf2@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@shinkuro.com>
In-Reply-To: <20101129152702.GI33199@shinkuro.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1011291612020.4075@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk>
References: <20101125175247.GH21047@shinkuro.com> <alpine.LSU.2.00.1011261558520.4075@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk> <D8E75C03-0322-4594-BB27-D825AB429EA6@hopcount.ca> <C4FB358F-53D1-4A2B-A3A4-1C07222C0B51@dotat.at> <1E1C9726-46B6-4891-A1A4-9D71A90EFE47@hopcount.ca> <20101127185010.GB56062@farside.isc.org> <79DC22E8-18BC-44B1-8874-D094844D9E94@dotat.at> <8CEF048B9EC83748B1517DC64EA130FB43E00387CC@off-win2003-01.ausregistrygroup.local> <20101129143919.GE33199@shinkuro.com> <4CF3C0BA.1050307@abenaki.wabanaki.net> <20101129152702.GI33199@shinkuro.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LSU 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: Tony Finch <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] draft-liman-tld-names-04
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 16:17:50 -0000

On Mon, 29 Nov 2010, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>
> Now, we have considerable discussion in the first part of that passage
> that explains why the restrictions that are being introduced are so
> introduced, despite the fact that the protocol itself happens not to
> have such restrictions.  So, are those rules "merely" allocation
> policy, or not?

The host name rules are not allocation policy. They are encoded in a
number of protocols, such as SMTP, URI syntax, etc. etc. The host name
rules are a protocol layer above the raw DNS and shared by most
application protocols.

Note there are protocols that put non-hostname labels in the DNS, such as
SRV and DKIM.

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  <dot@dotat.at>  http://dotat.at/
HUMBER THAMES DOVER WIGHT PORTLAND: NORTH BACKING WEST OR NORTHWEST, 5 TO 7,
DECREASING 4 OR 5, OCCASIONALLY 6 LATER IN HUMBER AND THAMES. MODERATE OR
ROUGH. RAIN THEN FAIR. GOOD.