IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: the names that aren't DNS names problem, was Last Call: <draft-ietf-dnsop-onion-tld-00.txt>

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Fri, 24 July 2015 08:48 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB3C51A1B86 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 01:48:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 RGI45XOFeZDE for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 01:48:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-2.cisco.com (aer-iport-2.cisco.com [173.38.203.52]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CACC1A1B53 for <IETF@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 01:48:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2124; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1437727726; x=1438937326; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=eocr32qESY8jTVXVVWxYvDXp5D2w10wlGLhbYtO7Icw=; b=jse9EV+UO448objTcsLUrE02wq8oUfxozR1Clr8L433dqlsIeD4SP1Rj TLyZbx29UQbs+4Siz2TKx38wHlrW9wedeGvjZGadF3kL9xSf7U/hxWJq7 XWduPAm1SJyXSlWUGtLBk2VMrFuRIZWNZ7llF9XXI3dBsIIJS55virjI0 8=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 481
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AEAwB0+rFV/xbLJq1chBY8gyO4XQmHdgKBexQBAQEBAQEBgQqEJAEBBCNVARALDgoJFgsCAgkDAgECAUUGAQwGAgEBiCq0NpYQAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARmLTYUHB4JpgUMBBIxBhSWCfYI3gVeILoFFhB2CcJBSJmSBKhwVgUA8MYJLAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,537,1432598400"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="580171673"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-3.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 24 Jul 2015 08:48:44 +0000
Received: from [10.61.94.229] (ams3-vpn-dhcp7910.cisco.com [10.61.94.229]) by aer-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t6O8mi0C001309; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 08:48:44 GMT
Subject: Re: the names that aren't DNS names problem, was Last Call: <draft-ietf-dnsop-onion-tld-00.txt>
To: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
References: <20150720192219.53802.qmail@ary.lan> <55ADF2A7.3080403@cisco.com> <A0418F96-1D79-4BE9-A72A-7A47641E4AF3@gmail.com> <CAKr6gn1apWx2M7V-O6ea2kvor7Di6=jYMh-uY2ouTsgjkV6vLw@mail.gmail.com> <20150722084204.GA15378@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <CAKr6gn2413-2XW8d_stw0dTmP-KsmGgFgQ3tVXEgXrXmnCiQow@mail.gmail.com> <6E97605B-C11E-4349-90FC-109E4983112C@istaff.org> <45F6578D-BA19-4333-8935-C954BBD9AEE8@nominum.com> <F8B1240553F1ED877E42F66D@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <5A72A128-78D0-47A5-A962-5DB39E84E640@virtualized.org>
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <55B1FBEE.7020002@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 10:48:46 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5A72A128-78D0-47A5-A962-5DB39E84E640@virtualized.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="HB0HeLGEb7WFaPHuDJLdWgvQIfwl4JlQb"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/1Vp1xMjY7Qpv-EuVRtuYd0wMegw>
Cc: ietf <IETF@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 08:48:48 -0000

Hi,

On 7/24/15 9:21 AM, David Conrad wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Jul 24, 2015, at 12:15 AM, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> wrote:
>>> Ideally, ICANN ought to give IETF an opportunity to say "no, don't allocate that name"
>> I hesitate to think about what would
>> happen if we said "no", but assume it would involve
>> organizations trying to get their $300-$400K (each) back and
>> lawyers.
> Yep. In addition, it would probably result in the non-trivial political and economic forces endemic to ICANN interested in blocking a name (for whatever reason) redirecting their energies to the IESG (or whoever the IETF decides "we" are). After all, if they can't legitimately block a name through the ICANN processes, they'd get one last bite at the apple at the IETF.
>
> I'm guessing this probably isn't what folks in the IETF would want.
>

This is ridiculous.

As Ted highlighted, John has thrown up a straw man that nobody would
ever reasonably propose (the IESG being consulted on every name), where
that has nothing to do with 6761 or any other existing or contemplated
process.

Can we please at least stay within the realm of reality?

Eliot

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email