RE: Domain as Nameserver

"Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com> Mon, 29 October 2001 13:23 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se>
Received: from nic.cafax.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nic.cafax.se (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id f9TDNdos016799 for <ietf-provreg-outgoing@nic.cafax.se>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 14:23:39 +0100 (MET)
Received: by nic.cafax.se (8.12.1/8.12.1/Submit) id f9TDNcgu016798 for ietf-provreg-outgoing; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 14:23:38 +0100 (MET)
X-Authentication-Warning: nic.cafax.se: majordom set sender to owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se using -f
Received: from heron.verisign.com (heron.verisign.com [216.168.233.95]) by nic.cafax.se (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id f9TDNbos016793 for <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 14:23:37 +0100 (MET)
Received: from VSVAPOSTALGW1.prod.netsol.com (vsvapostalgw1.prod.netsol.com [216.168.234.201]) by heron.verisign.com (nsi_0.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA11824; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 08:21:33 -0500 (EST)
Received: by VSVAPOSTALGW1.prod.netsol.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <4VQ82Z5P>; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 08:20:36 -0500
Message-ID: <3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD6C5FBD3@vsvapostal3.prod.netsol.com>
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
To: 'Patrick' <patrick@gandi.net>, asbjorn.rrp@theglobalname.org
Cc: ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject: RE: Domain as Nameserver
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 08:13:52 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Precedence: bulk

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrick [mailto:patrick@gandi.net]
> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 7:52 AM
> 
> 
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 12:40:12PM -0000, 
> asbjorn.rrp@theglobalname.org took time to write:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > in draft-ietf-provreg-epp-host-03.txt it states:
> > 
> >   <<This document assumes that host name objects have a subordinate
> >   relationship to a superordinate domain name object.  For 
> example, host
> >   name "ns1.example.com" has a subordinate relationship to 
> domain name
> >   "example.com".  EPP actions (such as object transfers) that do not
> >   preserve this relationship MUST be explicitly disallowed.>>
> > 
> > Let's use the .INFO Registry in our example [1]:
> > 
> > If someone registers example.INFO, the RegistrANT has full 
> control over the example.INFO zone, and he can thus use the 
> domain name itself as a nameserver if he wants to.
> > 
> > Will EPP allows the RegistrANT to add example.INFO as a 
> _nameserver_ in the Registry, or do .INFO nameserver have to 
> be on the third level?
> 
> As far as I have seem from experimentations, they do not, but they
> should (or at least it is not forbidden in the drafts, but they are
> doing many things not explained anywhere)

I agree that this sort of behavior isn't forbidden in the drafts, as it
shouldn't be.  If example.info can exist as a name server in the DNS (and it
can), the protocol should be able to provision a name server with that name.
It might be confusing, but it's DNS-legal.

-Scott-