On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Eliot Lear <l...@cisco.com> wrote: > So... Alec and I did a bit of wordsmithing and what I propose is a slight > clarification on the existing text, based on this exchange, and here it is: > > > Like Top-Level Domain Names, .onion addresses can have an arbitrary > number of subdomain components. Only the first first label to the > left of ".onion" is significant to the layer 3 Tor protocol, while > application layers above have access to the full name. For example... > > > And then an HTTP example would be inserted (or otherwise "For example..." > taken out). > > Eliot >
This thread has taught me more about the .onion names - thanks for that. But I would have to agree with those that think this bit of explanation is unnecessary to the RFC and should be excluded, rather than attempting to clarify it. The RFC only needs to deal with ".onion". No need to explain the other parts of the name. -- Bob Harold
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
