On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 06:12:31PM +0000,
Ray Bellis <r...@bellis.me.uk> wrote
a message of 28 lines which said:
> The "locally served zones" and "special use domains" registries are
> different.
Why are they different, by the way? I really do not understand
that. The "locally served zones" registry should be a strict subset of
the "special use domains" registry, for the case where RFC 6761 says
"4. Caching DNS Servers: Are developers of caching domain name servers
expected to make their implementations recognize these names as
special and treat them differently? If so, how?" and the answer is
"serve locally".
[Speaking of this, the lack of a formal language in the "special use
domains" registry, allowing a resolver to be compiled with automatic
inclusion of all the special cases, is the only really serious problem
in RFC 6761. I regret that draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps-02 does not even
mention it.]
> It's possible that some special use domains might benefit from
> special treatment in the root zone, too (".localhost" ?)
Let me advertise again my draft :-) draft-bortzmeyer-dname-root
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
