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

Ted Faber <faber@ISI.EDU> Tue, 08 July 2008 02:03 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90A8F28C3B7; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 19:03:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3710928C3BE for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 19:03:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.321
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.321 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.278, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iej+rH5ygOez for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 19:03:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from boreas.isi.edu (boreas.isi.edu [128.9.160.161]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62A4028C39D for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 19:03:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zod.isi.edu (zod.isi.edu [128.9.168.221]) by boreas.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m6822T95006766 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 7 Jul 2008 19:02:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from faber@localhost) by zod.isi.edu (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id m6822S9K015420; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 19:02:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from faber)
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 19:02:28 -0700
From: Ted Faber <faber@ISI.EDU>
To: Mark Andrews <Mark_Andrews@isc.org>
Subject: Re: Update of RFC 2606 based on the recent ICANN changes ?
Message-ID: <20080708020228.GC10677@zod.isi.edu>
References: <20080708013242.GB10677@zod.isi.edu> <200807080147.m681lFBO059641@drugs.dv.isc.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <200807080147.m681lFBO059641@drugs.dv.isc.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
X-url: http://www.isi.edu/~faber
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: faber@zod.isi.edu
Cc: Theodore Tso <tytso@MIT.EDU>, moore@network-heretics.com, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
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>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0778885541=="
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 11:47:15AM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
> 
> > The site-dependent interpretation of the name is determined not by the
> > presence of dot within the name but its absence from the end.
> 
> 	No.  Please go and re-read RFC 921.

What a charming document.

I don't see anything in it that indicates a hierarchical name can't
consist of one level, though I see plenty of examples of 2-level names.
If you see text in there that I missed, I'm all ears.

I do see this in RFC 1035, though:

>When a user needs to type a domain name, the length of each label is
>omitted and the labels are separated by dots (".").  Since a complete
>domain name ends with the root label, this leads to a printed form which
>ends in a dot.  We use this property to distinguish between:
>
>   - a character string which represents a complete domain name
>     (often called "absolute").  For example, "poneria.ISI.EDU."
>
>   - a character string that represents the starting labels of a
>     domain name which is incomplete, and should be completed by
>     local software using knowledge of the local domain (often
>     called "relative").  For example, "poneria" used in the
>     ISI.EDU domain.
>
>Relative names are either taken relative to a well known origin, or to a
>list of domains used as a search list.  Relative names appear mostly at
>the user interface, where their interpretation varies from
>implementation to implementation, and in master files, where they are
>relative to a single origin domain name.  The most common interpretation
>uses the root "." as either the single origin or as one of the members
>of the search list, so a multi-label relative name is often one where
>the trailing dot has been omitted to save typing.

That sounds a lot to me like "hk." is as global as "hk.com."

-- 
Ted Faber
http://www.isi.edu/~faber           PGP: http://www.isi.edu/~faber/pubkeys.asc
Unexpected attachment on this mail? See http://www.isi.edu/~faber/FAQ.html#SIG
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf