I think this is a useful and interesting discussion. but it's anchored in the .alt proposal which we should separate from the onion tld last call I hope.
Thanks joel On 7/19/15 6:55 AM, John R Levine wrote: >> so: offering someone a chance to register that a conflict exists does >> not serve the purpose of advancing interoperability. that is, the >> information "ONION.ALT exists, see http://whatever"; is useful, whereas >> the information "ONION.ALT exists, see http://someplace and/or >> http://someplace_else"; is not useful. this, to me, is what FCFS means. > > Really, I get that. But here's the two options: > > A) registry says "ONION.ALT exists, see http://someplace and/or > http://someplace_else";, you say hm, two different packages, I better > look at both of them to see which one is installed on my computer. > > B) registry says "ONION.ALT exists, see http://someplace";, you look at > it and scratch your head when you realize it's not what's on your > computer so you go do a Google search and eventually find > http://someplace_else. > > There is no C), since we don't control what software people write. I > don't understand why B) would be better for anyone. > > Regards, > John Levine, jo...@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY > Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
