Re: Update of RFC 2606 based on the recent ICANN changes ?

[David Conrad <[e-mail]>]

On Jun 28, 2008, at 9:35 PM, SM wrote:
> The domain name may be confused with an IP address.  That can be  
> avoided by not allocating numbers from zero to 255 as TLDs.

You need a bit more than that.  Under MacOSX (10.5.3, and I suspect  
most BSD derivatives at the very least):

% ping 127.1024
PING 127.1024 (127.0.4.0): 56 data bytes
...
% ping 1.1712312
PING 1.1712312 (1.26.32.184): 56 data bytes
...
% ping 0xdeadbeef
PING 0xdeadbeef (222.173.190.239): 56 data bytes
...
% ping 0xa.0xa
PING 0xa.0xa (10.0.0.10): 56 data bytes
...

Etc.

> That's different from an IETF-based "bad" list.

I'm suggesting it would be helpful if there were an RFC directing IANA  
to establish a registry that contains both labels and rules (e.g, no  
all-numeric strings, no strings that start with 0x and contain  
hexadecimal values, the string 'xn--', the 2606 strings, etc.) that  
specify what cannot be placed into the root zone.  As part of future  
IANA actions, any time a protocol defines a new TLD (e.g., .local) an  
entry should be placed into that registry.

Would there be the downside to this?

Thanks,
-drc

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf