On 7/1/15, 1:47, "DNSOP on behalf of str4d" <dnsop-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of st...@i2pmail.org> wrote: >.onion and .i2p (and to my knowledge, the other proposed P2P-Names >TLDs too) have to conform to DNS rules in order to be usable in legacy >applications that expect domain names.
I'd been told that "onion." was a one-time thing, that in the future conflicts wouldn't happen. What I read in the quoted message is that "onion."'s request isn't a one-time thing but a sign of things to come. I'm sympathetic to the use the path of least resistance - e.g., use names that syntactically are DNS names - instead of building a separate application base. I expect innovation to be free-form and thus a stream of unpredictable requests to reserve names for special purposes, including DNS-like names. What DNSOP can comment on is how the DNS "reacts" to names, whether in protocol or operational convention, once they are known before they achieve some degree of widespread adoption. To what extent is an effort made (by whomever) to detect these budding namespaces, is this proactive?
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
