Whats your reaction going to be, to a closed 6761 because if you come to the microphone with a "but we built to the userbase, we have millions" and make bambi eyes, I feel a bit like saying "you were warned"
ie, squatting a domain, is squatting a domain, no matter how much you believe in your own process. If you populate code to the label, a specific label, you're in moral hazard. You cannot predict what label (if any) you will get. You need to code agile, to a label being in another space (eg .alt) which is also unknown. it has to be in a .conf or other runtime option, not hard coded. forever. -G On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 7:40 AM, str4d <st...@i2pmail.org> wrote: > On 29/03/16 07:53, John Levine wrote: >> Finally, no matter what we do, at some point someone will come by with >> .GARLIC which is like .ONION but stronger and they will say (with some >> justification) that it's used by a zillion people around the world. >> "You should have used GARLIC.ALT." "Yeah, I guess so, but we didn't, >> sorry." Then we'll have to deal with it one way or the other. I hope >> that .alt will push that day off farther into the future but it's >> unlikely to push it to infinity. > > Injecting a little levity: I2P does in fact use a variant of onion > routing called garlic routing! But we are already in the 6761 process > for .I2P, and have absolutely no desire to take garlic any further than > a technical metaphor :) > > str4d > > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
