On Feb 9, 2023, at 06:33, Willem Toorop <wil...@nlnetlabs.nl> wrote: > > Op 07-02-2023 om 16:45 schreef Paul Wouters:> I find the valid use of the > name "invalid" to be pretty horrible. An >> engineer looking at a catalog might quickly believe >> the invalid is a bug where it should have shown a real domain. Why not >> _catalog.arpa or something ? > > We, the co-authors, actually prefer producers to use a domain they own > (because no chance on collisions with consumers from multiple producers). > I've done a commit to express that more clearly. The new text is: > > ``It is RECOMMENDED to use a domain name owned by the catalog producer if > possible, or if that is not possible use a name under a suitable name such as > "invalid." [RFC6761].''
A name under a suitable name such as invalid would then be “example.com.invalid” and not as it has now just “invalid” ? Or it could use “_catalog.example.com” ? Paul _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
