Re: [homenet] WGLC on "redact" and "homenet-dot"

[Ted Lemon <[e-mail]>]

On Dec 12, 2016, at 4:56 PM, james woodyatt <[e-mail]> wrote:
> I would strongly prefer that we avoid the risks above by using a special-purpose subdomain of a gTLD owned by IETF. I don’t really care which gTLD we use, and if “arpa” is really the only reasonable choice, then so be it. However, I can imagine a world where the Working Group decides that “arpa” is unacceptable for whatever reason and decides that it’s better to wait until IETF has another domain with a better name. And I’m not ready to tell them I think that would be a very bad idea.

Remember that if we allocated some subdomain like .arpa, we would face a different procedural problem with ICANN that would almost certainly take a similar amount of time to resolve.

From a process perspective, trying to get ICANN to do an insecure delegation for .homenet is actually a worthwhile thing to do; the challenge is that it introduces some substantial potential for delay and uncertainty.   So does your non-.arpa TLD idea, so from our perspective there is no difference, whether or not there may be some difference for the IETF as a whole.   We will almost certainly be visiting that problem space in the future.

That said, if expedient is what the WG wants, .arpa is what’s expedient.   As I say, I am not leaning strongly in either direction.   I think that a strong argument for one choice or the other would either have to do with .homenet being technically better for some reason, or with the delay being unacceptable.   Right now I don’t think we’re under that kind of time pressure, which is why I’m not more exercised about the possibility of a long delay in getting .homenet delegated.