On 2/8/17, 16:31, "DNSOP on behalf of Paul Hoffman" <dnsop-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of paul.hoff...@vpnc.org> wrote:
> The authors have tentatively made some substantial changes to the draft,
to define "domain name"
I have a fundamental problem with that, meaning that a document within DNSOP is
defining domain names. Work I did to write (the still in progress) draft on
Domain Names has led me to believe that domain names are a concept beyond the
DNS protocol. On the other hand, the DNS protocol and operators of it, deserve
to have a definition in place, so I'm not totally convinced this is a bad idea.
Diving into the definition contained in the draft though, it needs work.
Referring to:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-04, for "Domain
Name" and "Label" :
) Domain name: An ordered list of zero or more labels.
) Label: An ordered list of zero or more octets and which makes up a
portion of a domain name.
This is a circular definition which makes it quite meaningless. E.g., "A is a
string of B's" and "B is a component of A."
I don't have a suggested fix. In as much as this isn't worth the paper you are
reading this on, I've been trying to find time to update my draft on Domain
Names, including, for now, rules on what would make a good definition. I only
mention this to express my frustration over not having something better to
offer.
The closest I have to a suggestion is to put any definition of Domain Name in a
DNS terminology document strictly in the context of documentation on the DNS
protocol, at least for now.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
