On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 3:28 PM, John R Levine wrote:
> I suppose I could use jrl.alt, but I wouldn't want to use plain .alt for
>>> fear of, if you'll pardon the phrase, name collisions.
>>>
>>
> Name collisions may occur at any delegation point - why do you think the
>> root zone is special in
I suppose I could use jrl.alt, but I wouldn't want to use plain .alt for
fear of, if you'll pardon the phrase, name collisions.
Name collisions may occur at any delegation point - why do you think the
root zone is special in this regard?
The point of .alt as I understand it is to provide a ho
On Thursday, 29 September 2016, John R Levine wrote:
> I've been telling people that if they need a fake private TLD for their
local network they should use one of those since it is exceedingly unlikely
ever to collide with a real DNS name. Am I right?
>>>
> C: why not just use .a
I've been telling people that if they need a fake private TLD for their local
network they should use one of those since it is exceedingly unlikely ever to
collide with a real DNS name. Am I right?
C: why not just use .alt for this? It is clear that these should not
hit the global DNS, and s
Hi -
A couple of items of history. Back about 1987, Jon Postel and I talked
about the original registration of .INT - he was the IANA, I was
managing the NIC contract which would be responsible for dealing with
registrations under .INT. ( .INT ended up being managed by ISI under an
DARPA co
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 1:42 AM, Edward Lewis wrote:
> On 9/29/16, 03:27, "DNSOP on behalf of John Levine" on behalf of jo...@taugh.com> wrote:
>
>> Last year Ed Lewis wrote an I-D proposing that XA-XZ be made private use and
>> the rest future use, but as far as I can tell it never went anywher
Mark,
On September 28, 2016 at 10:35:40 PM, Mark Andrews (ma...@isc.org) wrote:
Things can change. It is ALWAYS a bad idea to use namespace not
delegated to you.
Unless, of course, Ed's draft progresses and the user assigned ISO codes are
turned into private use TLDs (similar to RFC 1918 turni
Mark,
On September 28, 2016 at 5:08:05 PM, Mark Andrews (ma...@isc.org) wrote:
> I've been telling people that if they need a fake private TLD for their local
> network they should use one of those since it is exceedingly unlikely
> ever to collide with a real DNS name. Am I right?
No. Just be
It wasn't particularly clear which later message in this thread to respond
to so I'm replying to the first. If anyone is interested, I happen to know
John Postel's opinion on this matter. If you look at early drafts of RFC
2606, such as
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-dnsind-test-tlds-06
> On Sep 29, 2016, at 2:56 AM, hellekin wrote:
>
>> On 09/29/2016 05:42 AM, Edward Lewis wrote:
>>
>> The one option you have is ".example", unfortunately (and in sympathy)
>> I don't have a better suggestion.
>>
>
> .example is for documentation. You can use .invalid for "fake private
> TL
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 11:27:20PM -, John Levine wrote:
> The codes AA, QM-QZ, XA-XZ, and ZZ are "user assigned" and will never
> be used for countries. Last year Ed Lewis wrote an I-D proposing that
> XA-XZ be made private use and the rest future use, but as far as I can
> tell it never wen
"John R Levine" writes:
> They're not assigned, they're not unassigned, they're not reserved,
> they're not formerly assigned, they're not anything.
>
> For about $40 one can buy a copy of ISO 3166-1:2013. It's not clear from
> the TOC if it's any more informative.
The rules are in Sect
David Conrad writes:
>
> I'd really like to say yes, but ISO-3166/MA appears to have removed
> references
> to "User Assigned" in their official ISO-3166 two letter code w=
> webpage.
Only the the standard is normative.
> I'm trying to understand if they've changed their mind, but no an
On 09/29/2016 05:42 AM, Edward Lewis wrote:
>
> The one option you have is ".example", unfortunately (and in sympathy)
> I don't have a better suggestion.
>
.example is for documentation. You can use .invalid for "fake private
TLD", which makes it very clear that it's not a valid TLD. (Sorry
On 9/29/16, 03:27, "DNSOP on behalf of John Levine" wrote:
> Last year Ed Lewis wrote an I-D proposing that XA-XZ be made private use and
> the rest future use, but as far as I can tell it never went anywhere.
I'd been waiting for anyone else to show an interest in it before spending any
time
In message <20160929025351.9873.qm...@ary.lan>, "John Levine" writes:
> >No. Just because countries don't get assigned these values it
> >doesn't mean that they can't be assigned by ICANN or the IETF in
> >consultation with ICANN.
>
> I don't see how that follows. For over 30 years, the rule ha
>No. Just because countries don't get assigned these values it
>doesn't mean that they can't be assigned by ICANN or the IETF in
>consultation with ICANN.
I don't see how that follows. For over 30 years, the rule has been
that two-letter names are reserved for ccTLDs. There's never been any
hin
I've been telling people that if they need a fake private TLD for their local
?? network they should use one of those since it is exceedingly unlikely
?? ever to collide with a real DNS name. Am I right?
??
I'd really like to say yes, but ISO-3166/MA appears to have removed references to
"User
John,
On September 28, 2016 at 4:27:51 PM, John Levine (jo...@taugh.com) wrote:
I don't think this has anything to do with RFC 6761, so ...
I tend to agree, but it did get caught up in the 6761 maelstrom
For a very long time, two letter TLDs have been assigned to countries
and other geographic
In message <20160928232720.9513.qm...@ary.lan>, "John Levine" writes:
> I don't think this has anything to do with RFC 6761, so ...
>
> For a very long time, two letter TLDs have been assigned to countries
> and other geographic entities per the ISO 3166 alpha-2 list. The
> earliest mention I ca
I don't think this has anything to do with RFC 6761, so ...
For a very long time, two letter TLDs have been assigned to countries
and other geographic entities per the ISO 3166 alpha-2 list. The
earliest mention I can find is in RFC 920 in 1984, and even then the
wording suggests that the usage w
21 matches
Mail list logo