Eliot, On Aug 15, 2022, at 7:41 AM, Eliot Lear <l...@lear.ch> wrote: > What I like about .alt (or whatever we end up calling it) is that it requires > a single or small number of changes, not one change per name space.
It creates a new namespace (*.alt), presumably one that is less contentious than the root. The allocation policy for names in that sub-namespace is undefined at this point. There is an implicit assumption that all the unpleasantness that has resulted in the current ICANN process won’t be visited upon that sub-namespace. That’s probably true as there doesn’t seem to be a lot of incentive to use .alt (other than ‘for the good of the Internet’). > That will help reduce leakage. Leakage occurs because underlying systems are unaware of special handling requirements for a particular name. I believe the assumption is that all resolvers (of all kinds) will be aware that they should not forward a name ending with .alt to the DNS. This is a hard problem at Internet scale. As with .local, I’ll be surprised if declaring .alt a SUDN will have much impact on the amount of leakage. Regards, -drc
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
