On 3/16/17, 21:26, "DNSOP on behalf of Paul Hoffman" <dnsop-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of paul.hoff...@vpnc.org> wrote:
>Please do note that we already have such a discussion (that will go for >IETF consensus) active in draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis. We've been >asking for feedback on this topic already, and even you gave us some. >:-) I'm not sure if the "you" is directed at me, I did comment, so perhaps. There's a certain catch-22 [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilemma] in play. Yes, the DNS needs a definition for Domain Names as the term is used across the documents on the DNS protocol and system. But there's never been work to define Domain Names beyond the DNS protocol. The dilemma is that for dns-terminology-bis, not having Domain Name defined would be a serious omission, but the general, "beyond the DNS" definition has never been formalized and documented.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
