On Wednesday, 12 February 2020 22:43:07 UTC Linda Dunbar wrote: > Paul, > > ... > > This document is meant to describe potential problems of utilizing Cloud > Resources. It is a good idea to document the potential collisions and > conflicts and recommend Globally unique names. How about adding the > following sentences to the section? > > ------ > However, even with carefully managed policies and configurations, > collisions can still occur. If you use an internal name like .cloud and > then want your services to be available via or within some other cloud > provider which also uses .cloud, then it can't work. Therefore, it is > better to use the global domain name even when an organization does not > make all its namespace globally resolvable. An organization's globally > unique DNS can include subdomains that cannot be resolved at all outside > certain restricted paths, zones that resolve differently based on the > origin of the query and zones that resolve the same globally for all > queries from any source. Globally unique names do not equate to globally > resolvable names or even global names that resolve the same way from every > perspective. Globally unique names do prevent any possibility of collision > at the present or in the future and they make DNSSEC trust manageable. It's > not as if there is or even could be some sort of shortage in available > names that can be used, especially subdomains and the ability to delegate > administrative boundaries are considered.
i think that language is both accurate and adequate. good luck with your document. -- Paul _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
