Re: [regext] EPP and DNAME records?

[Stephane Bortzmeyer <[e-mail]>]

On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 02:31:37PM -0500,
 John Levine <[e-mail]> wrote 
 a message of 38 lines which said:

> I continue to believe that allowing DNAMEs in TLDs is a bad idea,
> and so I see no reason to spend further effort on this extension.

Really, I do not understand, and I would appreciate explanations. The
original use case is not for DNAME in TLDs. So, whatever you think of
DNAME in TLDs does not mean the extension is useless.

> With respect to DNAMEs at the top level, someone else noted that the
> root zone isn't managed the same way as TLDs, so there's no obvious
> connection.

Already replied but see
<https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/lGdwGFO58iJ_dYYM9UR87Er9F5c>

> Since you can get the effect of a DNAME in the root zone by putting
> a DNAME at the apex of a TLD as Taiwan has done,

No, the goal here is to have no NS delegation (for reasons explained
in RFC 7535). So, this cannot work.

> it might be more productive to consider how to invent a policy to
> allow a DNAME-only TLD if you're not a ccTLD.

I'm not in policy, draft-bortzmeyer-dname-root and
draft-bortzmeyer-regext-epp-dname are purely technical.