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

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Sun, 26 July 2015 14:34 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.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 1E4761A892A for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 26 Jul 2015 07:34:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 S_eOn7QlZ__l for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 26 Jul 2015 07:34:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x232.google.com (mail-wi0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B8DE1A891A for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 26 Jul 2015 07:34:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wibxm9 with SMTP id xm9so80938905wib.0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 26 Jul 2015 07:34:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=AG924LuuIEVD/l76YmFGwhOw5qe5pmqIrxWYJ9oJkNY=; b=iHQ46GcvzUihCMKJ956YgGfMY/vDUM6Zqmm/0MJu5wpyx9d90vfAZwXronVr7wI1q2 fDcyrBSU19F+EgH3raiarpReLXOkPAqrVnrh8bTPKHZbdy4wt+DP/EdNbosc095Y2lFu l8Nbn7HNMnPyoVqawTg+r+N+rBT+0yrLObhJluY0LBrVErstqyTZoprND90eaGUI9ZSr ISH1zWVXGdadFrs5LFHN6K2PW1AJU8V+w0y0s/b+gMHehl8XakuDViCN6kzvhV5gYHU6 NMRenifz0rpTJONLS6HD8HrgIplXGtRgja6RqOJ2bnzCbccXPjGjiKAepN1q7C3NkDR3 UXvQ==
X-Received: by 10.194.78.210 with SMTP id d18mr44287164wjx.34.1437921252953; Sun, 26 Jul 2015 07:34:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.4] (cpc11-brig18-2-0-cust561.3-3.cable.virginm.net. [81.100.118.50]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id be9sm22796452wjb.26.2015.07.26.07.34.11 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 26 Jul 2015 07:34:11 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <55B4EFE4.6060200@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 02:34:12 +1200
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: the names that aren't DNS names problem, was Last Call: <draft-ietf-dnsop-onion-tld-00.txt>
References: <20150725165829.76805.qmail@ary.lan> <413CD2A31E4AFF293091DD05@JcK-HP5.jck.com> <DM2PR0301MB065582F1A4F6854EF86D4C8AA8800@DM2PR0301MB0655.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <A005522A947794D54E141DEC@JcK-HP5.jck.com> <20150726072936.GB5857@mx2.yitter.info>
In-Reply-To: <20150726072936.GB5857@mx2.yitter.info>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/lFU8OPYSobcEpY4j4fhvVd7z_jE>
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: Sun, 26 Jul 2015 14:34:16 -0000

On 26/07/2015 19:29, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> Anyway, it's quite clear that ICANN's new delegation decisions
> circa 2001 rendered 1591 obsolete (though why ICANN never published
> updates to 1591 is a mystery to me).  

At least, an update rescinding the sentence "It is extremely unlikely that
any other TLDs will be created." But it was always clear that the IETF
kept the power of decision for assignments of domain names for technical
uses, which has nothing to do with string lengths.

     Brian