Re: [homenet] review of draft-ietf-homenet-redact and draft-ietf-homenet-dot

[Jari Arkko <[e-mail]>]

>>> Also, the insecure delegation in the root zone puts us into a
>>> place where we have not been before, process-wise, because
>>> this is a special use domain name and a proper TLD at the same
>>> time, causing us to run both the ICANN and the IETF process,
>> 
>> As long as we understand "run the ICANN process" as including "getting
>> ICANN to invent such a process", I agree with the above.

This is my understanding as well.

> I agree with Andrew and think we need to consider this step quite carefully.  This text in the IANA considerations section:
> 
>    IANA is requested to set up insecure delegation for '.homenet' in the
>    root zone pointing to the AS112 service [RFC7535], to break the
>    DNSSEC chain of trust.
> 
> does not explain that there is no process through which IANA can set up that delegation.  It may not even be an IANA process.  If this text were to be published in an RFC, I don't think IANA can carry out that instruction today, and I don't think IANA has the authority to negotiate a process through which it can carry out the instruction in the future.
> 
> I think this text should be modified in some way, before the document is published, to recognize explicitly that no such process exists today and that such a process is requested as part of the implementation of the published document.
> 
> The homenet WG is, I believe, aware of the need for a process for instantiating an insecure delegation as requested in the -dot document.  In my opinion, the implicit request for such a process should be made explicit in some way.

Good advice. Thanks.

Jari