Paul:
It is not the ISE that is ignoring RFC 6761, but this group. 6761
envisioned this precise case. For whatever reason, that document didn't
take the next step and actually reserve a TLD. Sometimes it is
reasonable to do things incrementally. But what is not reasonable to
expect research
+1
This feels like a process run-around. The conversation has been held
in DNSOP and didn't reach consensus. It is not like the WG said "we
don't care" -the WG cared immensely. It just couldn't come to a single
point of view.
A lot of the issues are layer-8/9 and I think it's most likely this is
On Aug 1, 2022, at 08:31, Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear)
wrote:
>
I do not think the ISE should ignore or be a workaround for RFC 6761 Special
Use Domains. There any many problems with its application and its lack of
application but adding the ISE as a third party along with the
It appears that Paul Vixie said:
>i'm particularly interested in whether the root zone should have an NS
>for the private-label tld(s) (.alt or ._alt or whatever) with an NS of
>"localhost" and a dnssec "opt out" indicator so that these private tlds
>can fit into the authenticity infrastructur
It appears that Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear)
said:
> On the one hand, we need to find a
>way for people to explore alternative namespaces that look a bit like
>domain names. On the other hand, we don't want to create problems with
>user expectations.
It is fine for people to
On 8/1/22 12:01, Paul Vixie wrote:
I agree and I think publication of these drafts would be a good idea
(may be with status Experimental since, as Joe Abley said, there is
clearly no IETF consensus). Note that I am skeptical about their use:
most people who "preempt" .eth, .bitcoin, .web3 or .m
Excerpts from Stephane Bortzmeyer's message of 2022-08-01 17:29:38 +0200:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 02:31:48PM +0200,
> Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear) wrote
> a message of 89 lines which said:
>
> > Whether that means using TLD labels that begin with _ or whether
> > that means su
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote on 2022-08-01 08:29:
On Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 02:31:48PM +0200,
Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear) wrote
a message of 89 lines which said:
...
I agree and I think publication of these drafts would be a good idea
(may be with status Experimental since,
On Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 02:31:48PM +0200,
Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear) wrote
a message of 89 lines which said:
> Whether that means using TLD labels that begin with _ or whether
> that means suffixing them with ".ALT", I leave to you experts to
> sort. I do agree with Martin th
On Aug 1, 2022, at 15:58, Ben Schwartz
wrote:
> I think we already have such a mechanism: ICANN. People who want unique
> registrations can acquire them via the existing ICANN and registry processes.
I think we have been around and around these arguments at the ietf and in
various parts of t
Hello from your friendly neighborhood independent submissions editor.
It is indeed the case that draft-schanzen-gns is in conflict review. It
is also the case that Warren and I have been discussing that review.
Obviously there are some concerns. On the one hand, we need to find a
way for pe
I have no problem to understand the need and wish to test new configuration
before it is alive, but I do not think that it is correct to increase the
complexity of the DNSSEC protocol as the draft suggests. There are other ways
to achieve the same goal.
Zonemaster (https://zonemaster.net/) and
12 matches
Mail list logo
