On 16 Mar 2017, at 14:25, Edward Lewis wrote:
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.
No, it was directed to Ralph. The text that I quoted (that you cut out
here) was from him.
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.
Can you say more why you think that is a dilemma? It seems that
draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis could certainly be the first place
where it is formalized and documented.
--Paul Hoffman
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
