Re: IAB appeal for arpa assignment

[Matthew Kerwin <[e-mail]>]

You shouldn't cherry-pick parts of documents, the context is important to
understanding the quoted clauses. For example, Section 3:

-----8<-----
3.1 URI.ARPA Registration

3.1.1 Only Schemes in the IETF Tree Allowed

   In order to be inserted into the URI.ARPA zone, the subsequent URI
   scheme MUST be registered under the IETF URI tree.  The requirements
   for this tree are specified in [10].

3.1.2 Scheme Registration Takes Precedence

   The registration of a NAPTR record for a URI scheme MUST NOT precede
   proper registration of that scheme and publication of a stable
   specification in accordance with [10].  The IESG or its designated
   expert will review the request for

      1.  correctness and technical soundness

      2.  consistency with the published URI specification, and

      3.  to ensure that the NAPTR record for a DNS-based URI does not
          delegate resolution of the URI to a party other than the
          holder of the DNS name.  This last rule is to insure that a
          given URI's resolution hint doesn't hijack (inadvertently or
          otherwise) network traffic for a given domain.
----->8-----

Reference 10 is BCP 35 (currently RFC 7595), but that's not immediately
important. The objection referred to in §5 means that the URI.ARPA
registration request is not the place to discuss objections to the scheme
itself – if a scheme is registered according to BCP 35, it cannot be denied
to URI.ARPA.

However that doesn't apply, because the scheme hasn't been registered
according to BCP 35.

Cheers

On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 1:17 PM Timothy Mcsweeney <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Hello IAB,
>
> Section 5 of RFC3405 says "
>
> Registrations for the 'URI.ARPA' zone are sent to
>            '[e-mail]'.
>
> *I did that on 4/7/2020, IANA ticket #1167794*
>
> Section 5 of RFC3405 also says "
>
> If no objections
>    are made within a two week period, a representative of the
>    registration authority considers the submission to be accepted and
>    enters that submission into the nameserver.
>
> *After two weeks there were no objections.*
>
>
> Section 5 of RFC3405 also says "
>
>  Objections are restricted to those that point out impacts on the zone
>    itself or to DNS in general.  Objections to the URI scheme or to the
>    URN namespace-id are not allowed, as these should be raised in their
>    respective forums.  The logical conclusion of this is that ANY
>    sanctioned URI scheme or URN namespace MUST be allowed to be
>    registered if it meets the requirements specified in this document as
>    regards times to live and general impact to the DNS.
>
>
> *You must put my submission in the uri.arpa zone.*
>
> These are your rules.  I followed everyone of them and then some.
>
> Thank you,
> Tim McSweeney
>


-- 
  Matthew Kerwin
  https://matthew.kerwin.net.au/