On 2014-02-04, at 10:00, Paul Vixie <p...@redbarn.org> wrote: > Joe Abley wrote: >> ... >> >> ONION is like LOCAL. Neither are like ARPA (or any other TLD). > > How like LOCAL is ONION?
Neither is a zone in the DNS or a domain in the DNS namespace, and both refer to names for which a protocol other than DNS should be used for resolution. (I realise the protocol for LOCAL is DNS-like, but it's not DNS, right?) > ICANN knows it can't sell .LOCAL, but does > ICANN know it can't sell .ONION ? I was never quite sure what ICANN knew, even when I worked for ICANN. I'm not arguing against the IETF protecting the world from conflicting ONION namespaces in the same way that they did with LOCAL, which would have the effect that ICANN would not sell ONION. I agree that if ICANN sold ONION to someone, the result would be messy. However, I don't think ambiguity in the discussion about the namespaces we're talking about or the failure modes we're hoping to avoid helps us narrow in on anything resembling consensus. Joe
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
