I think you no longer need my approval, but just in case, this looks fine. Thanks!
Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone > Op 2 jun 2025 om 16:56 heeft Sarah Tarrant <starr...@staff.rfc-editor.org> > het volgende geschreven: > > Hi Stuart, > > Thank you for your reply. We have updated the text accordingly and have no > further questions. > > We will await your final approval. > > The updated files have been posted here (please refresh): > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9665.txt > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9665.pdf > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9665.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9665.xml > > The relevant diff files have been posted here (please refresh): > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9665-diff.html (comprehensive diff) > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9665-auth48diff.html (AUTH48 changes > only) > > Thank you, > RFC Editor/st > >> On Jun 1, 2025, at 2:51 PM, Stuart Cheshire <chesh...@apple.com> wrote: >> >>> On May 30, 2025, at 12:42, Sarah Tarrant <starr...@staff.rfc-editor.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Ted, >>> >>> Thank you for the speedy reply -- I've updated per your request. Please be >>> sure to refresh since I just updated these. >>> >>> We will await approvals from both authors. >> >> Thank you Sarah. >> >> Everything looks good, with just one final question. This is the last one, I >> promise. >> >> I previously wrote this text for the “Conventions and Terminology” section: >> >> Strictly speaking, fully qualified domain names end with a dot. >> In DNS zone files and other similar contexts, if the final dot is >> omitted, then a name may be treated incorrectly as relative to some >> other parent domain. This document follows the formal DNS >> convention, ending fully qualified domain names with a dot. >> When this document mentions domain names such as "local." and >> "default.service.arpa.", the final dot is part of the domain name >> and does not indicate the end of a sentence as it would in normal >> prose. >> >> I noticed that in the edit “dot” got changed to “period”, like this: >> >> Strictly speaking, fully qualified domain names end with a period. >> In DNS zone files and other similar contexts, if the final period is >> omitted, then a name may be treated incorrectly as relative to some >> other parent domain. This document follows the formal DNS >> convention, ending fully qualified domain names with a period ("."). >> When this document mentions domain names such as "local." and >> "default.service.arpa.", the final period is part of the domain name >> and does not indicate the end of a sentence as it would in normal >> prose. >> >> I’ve thought about this four a couple of days, wondering if it was worth >> mentioning, and I think it is. >> >> A dot in a DNS name is not the same as a period in English prose. They may >> look the same because they are generated by pressing the same key on the >> keyboard, but that’s superficial. They are not semantically the same thing. >> >> When speaking a domain name like “www.iana.org” out loud, no one says >> “period” for the dots. Still, this is just informal usage. The definitive >> source for the right terminology to use is the DNS RFCs. >> >> This morning I decided I should check to see what terminology other DNS RFCs >> use, since that is clearly the right precedent that this DNS RFC should >> follow. After some reading, I do think that “dot” is the correct IETF DNS >> terminology. >> >> RFC 1034 (DNS Concepts and Facilities) >> >> When a user needs to type a domain name, the length of each >> label is omitted and the labels are separated by dots ("."). >> Since a complete domain name ends with the root label, this >> leads to a printed form which ends in a dot. >> >> RFC 1035 (DNS Implementation and Specification) >> >> <domain-name>s make up a large share of the data in the master >> file. The labels in the domain name are expressed as character >> strings and separated by dots. Quoting conventions allow >> arbitrary characters to be stored in domain names. Domain names >> that end in a dot are called absolute, and are taken as complete. >> Domain names which do not end in a dot are called relative >> >> RFC 9499 (DNS Terminology) >> >> Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN): This is often just a clear way >> of saying the same thing as "domain name of a node", as outlined >> above. However, the term is ambiguous. Strictly speaking, a >> fully qualified domain name would include every label, including >> the zero-length label of the root; such a name would be written >> "www.example.net." (note the terminating dot). >> >> Nowhere in those RFCs do I see any mention of the DNS dot being called >> “period” or “full stop”. >> >> I think that RFC 9665 should be consistent with the existing DNS RFCs. >> >> Here is some updated suggested text: >> >> Strictly speaking, fully qualified domain names end with a dot ("."). >> In DNS zone files and other similar contexts, if the final dot is >> omitted, then a name may be treated incorrectly as relative to some >> other parent domain. This document follows the formal DNS >> convention, ending fully qualified domain names with a dot. >> When this document mentions domain names such as "local." and >> "default.service.arpa.", the final dot is part of the domain name; >> it is not a period indicating the end of the sentence. >> >> Stuart Cheshire >> > -- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
