Re: [Inip-discuss] Domain Names

[Warren Kumari <[e-mail]>]

Ed, I was wondering if you got a reply to this, perhaps off list?

So far yours is the only message on the list (other than the "welcome") -
it's still fairly unclear to me what the relationship is between this list
and the IAB program (is this a write only list? What is it supposed to be
commenting on / what output is there from the inip program (if any), what
is the relationship between that and the design team? Etc)

W
On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 10:43 AM Edward Lewis <[e-mail]> wrote:

> This message was originally sent to the iab mail list.  I'm repeating it
> on this inip-discuss list to move the discussion to this themed list for
> public discussion.
>
> The original message:
>
> As an outcome of work happening in the DNSOP WG, the work being the
> addition of .ONION to the Special Use Domain Names registry and the group
> looking to revamp the process for that registry, I researched the recorded
> history of Domain Names and am working on a draft that can be found here:
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lewis-domain-names-01
>
> The draft isn't a completed work, its a start which I think needs
> community review.  I'm looking to find the right place for it.  Despite
> the seemingly natural fit to the DNSOP WG, I don't believe that is the
> right fit.
>
> I'm asking the IAB for it's opinion on whether this is a network
> architectural issue or not.  I suppose the placement of the discussion
> within the IETF is a matter for the IESG, so I'm not asking about that in
> this message.  I only mention my qualms about DNSOP WG as a home as a
> motivation to wonder if the problem is an architectural one or not.
>
> What I've found, looking at the RFCs cited in the draft (as opposed to
> IETF folklore, memories, mail lists), is that the idea of Domain Names
> preceded the DNS.  There has never been a clear definition of Domain
> Names, they have assumed the role of the basis for identifiers and are
> used in many applications.  The DNS was built as an evolutionary
> operational step, not as studied architecture for managing identifiers.
>
> Is there a need to have an architectural understanding of how identifiers
> are used across the internet's protocols?  The example of Tor's ONION
> identifier (top-level name) pushes the point of how an identifier system
> can follow the fuzzy definition of what a Domain Name is while yet
> outright rejecting the management model of the DNS.  I'd once asked
> (privately to a few, about 2 years ago) whether the DNS defines Domain
> Names or do Domain Names define the DNS, in advance of this situation.  At
> the time I don't think anyone understood my question.
>
> I think, and I mean that as "think", there is a need to find a happy
> medium where identifiers can be managed in different ways (DNS hierarchy
> and zone admin vs. Tor's cryptographic basis) yet use similar syntax for
> the purposes of sharing existing protocols (like HTTP) while using
> different resolution processes.  The "victims" of not having a clear
> direction are implementers of client applications that will have to juggle
> different kinds of identifiers as well as those that implement lower (in
> the software stack) layers that manage how an identifier is resolved.
>
> Comments?
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Inip-discuss mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/inip-discuss
>