Re: [netmod] rfc6991bis: inet:host

Erik Auerswald <auerswal@unix-ag.uni-kl.de> Fri, 24 July 2020 10:14 UTC

Return-Path: <auerswal@unix-ag.uni-kl.de>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46DC83A0E45 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 03:14:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 MpuYexlwjptp for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 03:14:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw1.uni-kl.de (mailgw1.uni-kl.de [IPv6:2001:638:208:120::220]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3378D3A0E69 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 03:14:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sushi.unix-ag.uni-kl.de (sushi.unix-ag.uni-kl.de [IPv6:2001:638:208:ef34:0:ff:fe00:65]) by mailgw1.uni-kl.de (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8+deb8u2) with ESMTP id 06OAEHmi166690 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 24 Jul 2020 12:14:17 +0200
Received: from sushi.unix-ag.uni-kl.de (ip6-localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sushi.unix-ag.uni-kl.de (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4+deb7u1) with ESMTP id 06OAEHVd016820 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 24 Jul 2020 12:14:17 +0200
Received: (from auerswal@localhost) by sushi.unix-ag.uni-kl.de (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id 06OAEH6n016819; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 12:14:17 +0200
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 12:14:17 +0200
From: Erik Auerswald <auerswal@unix-ag.uni-kl.de>
To: Ladislav Lhotka <ladislav.lhotka@nic.cz>, tom petch <ietfc@btconnect.com>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20200724101417.GA15882@unix-ag.uni-kl.de>
References: <20200717191717.u5a3wv4nbajjdcaj@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de> <87ft9mzhe0.fsf@nic.cz> <20200721194434.pvekzgxaus43iihg@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de> <AM7PR07MB62482ED4917241DBCD08E7B7A0790@AM7PR07MB6248.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <20200722110030.6c7r6utxgjbsilkq@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de> <ff42e4cb-957c-a4f0-a88b-333a6565ed8e@nic.cz> <20200724083617.u3wkr34ehjezmusq@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200724083617.u3wkr34ehjezmusq@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/6YZvOIQ9kjM9wza6BsqogPnutUs>
Subject: Re: [netmod] rfc6991bis: inet:host
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 10:14:34 -0000

Hi,

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 10:36:17AM +0200, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 01:46:38PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> > On 22. 07. 20 13:00, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> > > 
> > > my understanding is that Lada is now proposing something slightly
> > > different but I am not sure what exactly, hence I asked again.
> > 
> > Oh yes, I messed it up by mixing different things together, sorry. I
> > checked again the ML archive, and the message that is relevant to this
> > thread is this:
> > 
> > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/PISOifrtow4oWLGW7meBBSri7nM/
> > 
> > The aim of that proposal was to limit the "inet:host" type to DNS names
> > that are reasonable as host names, i.e. eliminate values like "." or "_".
> 
> You are proposing to change the length restriction from 1..253 to
> 2..253 following RFC 952:
> 
>    [...] Single character names
>    or nicknames are not allowed.

What about single character host names currently used, e.g.,
a.root-servers.net.?

There are single character subdomain labels in use as well, e.g., l.de..

Best regards,
Erik