On 9/21/15, 16:36, "DNSOP on behalf of hellekin" <dnsop-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of helle...@gnu.org> wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA512 > >On 09/21/2015 11:50 AM, Edward Lewis wrote: >> >> I think defining -whether- name.onion is a Domain Name will make us >> re-think how Domain Names interoperate amongst protocols beyond the DN >S. >> > >Agreed, but why limit to .onion? Can your example stretch to include >.bit, .i2p, .gnu, .zkey, and why not .exit? You tell me. The draft is not necessarily comprehensive. Examples are not exhaustive lists. The point of the draft is to move from a situation where we have a hodgepodge of cases to one where we have a formal ontology. From there, the hope is that patterns will emerge that will increase determinism. >In a recent private conversation it was suggested that as long as a >domain cannot sell subdomains it could be interesting to consider >(without affecting ICANN domain-name business). This is a non-sequiter. "Selling" is not one of the criteria. OTOH, whether names are centrally assigned (as in DNS) or uniquely spawned (distributed hash tables) is a technical aspect, but even that doesn't really matter - what matters is the method of converting the name into, as appropriate, a location or other data value (key/cert for example). (IMHO, just about any mention of ICANN is a red herring.) The draft is trying to forge a definition of Domain Names, with a better understanding of how they function and interoperate amongst protocols. >Earlier we've been discussing P2PNames and came to the conclusion that >the term TLD should not be employed outside the DNS context, so I >welcome your draft to clarify this aspect. As mentioned in the draft, top-level names is defined very early on in the evolution of the concept. TLD has emerged, more so in the last 15 years, to be a specific kind of entity within the management of DNS operations. It is my suspicion/belief that the top-level name will retain special status as we go on because - and this is belief talking and not anything more mature - there needs to be some way to signal how the name "below" (in the rooted tree sense) is resolved. I.e., if I see "onion" I go to Tor, "local" mDNS, a numeric value is treated as a literal or error, a known DNS TLD to the DNS, and so on. I'm not sure this observation will be something that grows into the draft or not but is a central reason why I think we have to start with a basic definition. That list of examples can conceivably grow at the cost of complexifying[0] software. [0] yes, I know, not a word.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
