On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 12:30 PM, John Levine <jo...@taugh.com> wrote: > >>I think reserving a DNS-like namespace anchor of ALT is unnecessary; as >>I mentioned in my comments about the ONION draft, you have a choice of >>anywhere in the namespace to place that anchor, and there are an >>enormous number existing places in the DNS where you can reserve a name >>without denting root zone maintenance processes or existing DNS >>namespace policy. > > As a matter of arithmetic, you are of course correct. But in > practice, some names are much more equal than others and .onion is a > lot more mnemonic than .alliumcepa or .vtdsknmsknd. I doubt whether > the people who started using .corp and .mail and .home in their local > software a decade ago imagined that it would ever become a policy > issue. > >>If DNAME *is* to be used, the authors might make quiet enquiries as to >>how much trouble this would cause the people involved in root zone >>maintenance, ... > > There are TLDs whose zone file contains only a DNAME (other than the > mandatory stuff) so a possible band-aid would be to do that, using > the delegation of .arpa as a precedent for our ability to ask IANA > to install NS records for us. > > But the more I think about DNAME, the worse idea it seems to me.
I've removed the DNAME / AS112 idea, and published a new version. W > In > particular, since DNAME does not redirect its own name, that would > mean that even though alt.<anything> would not exist in the DNS, plain > alt. would exist, and that doesn't appear consistent with the goals of > this draft. It's a problem that doesn't occur with existing uses of > as112 since they're all subtrees of the .arpa namespace. > > R's, > John > > PS: > >>I like the quiet nod to the era of Usenet where people primarily >>exchanged text rather than 7-bit encoded MPEGs of mediocre network >>television. Those were the days. > > Whadda ya mean "were"? > > > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop -- I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
