IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Split the IANA functions?

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> Wed, 08 January 2014 23:21 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@anvilwalrusden.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 76FB21AD986 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:21:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.459
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.459 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_INFO=1.448, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, J_CHICKENPOX_45=0.6] autolearn=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 RGB9VTG-P-Ce for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:21:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx1.yitter.info (ow5p.x.rootbsd.net [208.79.81.114]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 865791AD945 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 15:21:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx1.yitter.info (nat-02-mht.dyndns.com [216.146.45.241]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6963B8A031 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 23:21:32 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2014 18:21:30 -0500
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Split the IANA functions?
Message-ID: <20140108232130.GN13117@mx1.yitter.info>
References: <CAMm+LwinAb6+7BoMzwBWyu63vofndxK9VY6DSNN0Ykza4SxuMQ@mail.gmail.com> <52CB0010.5010407@gmail.com> <CAMm+LwhN8+z9q4KQXVY9bWA6TAqxx1=Qg0OUfK=VGCSDg5uWEA@mail.gmail.com> <DD618936-0D13-41F1-8D89-2E3171D864B5@istaff.org> <52CB31F4.3090703@cs.tcd.ie> <52CB987A.20300@cisco.com> <20140107144412.GB11068@mx1.yitter.info> <94F13021-48B9-4CE9-995A-1081DC75A52D@isi.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <94F13021-48B9-4CE9-995A-1081DC75A52D@isi.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Wed, 08 Jan 2014 23:21:44 -0000

So that I don't have to keep replying to this off list:

On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 01:07:12PM -0800, manning bill wrote:

> There can be/ have been multiple roots in the DNS - HOWEVER, there is a always a single root _per class_.
> One root for IN, one root for CH, one for HS,  etc…

Right.  Except it turns out that CNAME and DNAME are specified in
terms of names and not name+class, so at the very least the class
boundaries are not as clean as we would like.

As you note, in any case, all anyone uses is IN.  

Best,

A


-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@anvilwalrusden.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email