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

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Fri, 24 July 2015 22:31 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.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 D2F801A9071 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 15:31:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.862
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.862 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 EybDACnRy4JL for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 15:31:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E50861A905E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 15:31:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 38150 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2015 22:31:42 -0000
Received: from unknown (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 24 Jul 2015 22:31:42 -0000
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 22:31:03 -0000
Message-ID: <20150724223103.72650.qmail@ary.lan>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: the names that aren't DNS names problem, was Last Call: <draft-ietf-dnsop-onion-tld-00.txt>
In-Reply-To: <55B1FBEE.7020002@cisco.com>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/ebDLbKtpARALTed-6DrO8xE01E4>
Cc: lear@cisco.com
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 22:31:28 -0000

>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?

Well, OK.  If the plan isn't that we get to look at every name in the
next round, what names do we get to look at?

It doesn't seem likely that we can prepare a complete set of names
with substantial informal use or other technical problems.  Some of
the problems depend on context.  For example, there is a lot of old
CPE that leaks queries for .BELKIN.  But maybe if a TLD application
were from the same company that made the leaky devices, that would be
OK.

R's,
John