There's an interesting (web-only) effort looking at a similar problem: https://github.com/krgovind/first-party-sets There, the goal is to establish commonality for the purposes of sharing state (and fate).
A great counter-example in that case is the relationship between github.com and github.io, which are administratively the same, but purposefully distinct from the perspective of web state. All this makes me wonder what your intent is with respect to semantics. o 0: states that no relationship exists between the domains o 1: states that some relationship exists between the domains That's incredibly vague. If you consider the possibility of there being richer expressions of semantics, this starts to look a bit like link relations at the DNS layer: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8288 On Tue, Oct 1, 2019, at 07:17, Stephen Farrell wrote: > > Hi all, > > As per discussion at IETF 105, Alex and I did some more > work on the RDBD draft (lots of text edits and a bit of > prototyping) and have posted a new version. [1] > > We'd be very interested in folks' opinions. > > Thanks, > Stephen & Alex. > > [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-brotman-rdbd-03 > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > > Attachments: > * 0x5AB2FAF17B172BEA.asc > * signature.asc _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
