IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [homenet] RFC 7788-bis

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> Fri, 17 June 2016 01:00 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5E4112D7D8 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 18:00:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 1oOq9b04PanJ for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 18:00:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx2.yitter.info (mx2.yitter.info [50.116.54.116]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE64712D914 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 18:00:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTP id 433BF10CAE for <homenet@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Jun 2016 01:00:47 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at crankycanuck.ca
Received: from mx2.yitter.info ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx2.yitter.info [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ab-B2-J6Yb0q for <homenet@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Jun 2016 01:00:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mx2.yitter.info (c-73-142-157-135.hsd1.nh.comcast.net [73.142.157.135]) by mx2.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 966371067D for <homenet@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Jun 2016 01:00:46 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 21:00:44 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
To: homenet@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20160617010044.GA22195@mx2.yitter.info>
References: <76ed7404-35ff-9cc8-262b-d5785595465c@isc.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <76ed7404-35ff-9cc8-262b-d5785595465c@isc.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/fHJhfwc9x-nOyk6LafHmMYDeKX4>
Subject: Re: [homenet] RFC 7788-bis
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/homenet/>
List-Post: <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 01:00:51 -0000

Quite apart from the correct remark of Ralph and Tim,

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 06:26:03PM +0100, Ray Bellis wrote:
> would like to obtain WG consensus on whether ".home" is indeed a
> suitable default domain for HNCP.

… it is not.  We know both that (1) it is already in use in the wild
in undetermined ways and (2) that some people have spent a bunch of
money attempting to get it delegated to them in the global DNS.  We
should not, IMO, even for a moment consider using a name with
well-known conflicting properties.

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@anvilwalrusden.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email