Hi Stuart, Thank you for your reply. We have updated the text accordingly and have no further questions.
We will await your final approval. The updated files have been posted here (please refresh): https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9665.txt https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9665.pdf https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9665.html https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9665.xml The relevant diff files have been posted here (please refresh): https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9665-diff.html (comprehensive diff) https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9665-auth48diff.html (AUTH48 changes only) Thank you, RFC Editor/st > On Jun 1, 2025, at 2:51 PM, Stuart Cheshire <chesh...@apple.com> wrote: > > On May 30, 2025, at 12:42, Sarah Tarrant <starr...@staff.rfc-editor.org> > wrote: > >> Hi Ted, >> >> Thank you for the speedy reply -- I've updated per your request. Please be >> sure to refresh since I just updated these. >> >> We will await approvals from both authors. > > Thank you Sarah. > > Everything looks good, with just one final question. This is the last one, I > promise. > > I previously wrote this text for the “Conventions and Terminology” section: > > Strictly speaking, fully qualified domain names end with a dot. > In DNS zone files and other similar contexts, if the final dot is > omitted, then a name may be treated incorrectly as relative to some > other parent domain. This document follows the formal DNS > convention, ending fully qualified domain names with a dot. > When this document mentions domain names such as "local." and > "default.service.arpa.", the final dot is part of the domain name > and does not indicate the end of a sentence as it would in normal > prose. > > I noticed that in the edit “dot” got changed to “period”, like this: > > Strictly speaking, fully qualified domain names end with a period. > In DNS zone files and other similar contexts, if the final period is > omitted, then a name may be treated incorrectly as relative to some > other parent domain. This document follows the formal DNS > convention, ending fully qualified domain names with a period ("."). > When this document mentions domain names such as "local." and > "default.service.arpa.", the final period is part of the domain name > and does not indicate the end of a sentence as it would in normal > prose. > > I’ve thought about this four a couple of days, wondering if it was worth > mentioning, and I think it is. > > A dot in a DNS name is not the same as a period in English prose. They may > look the same because they are generated by pressing the same key on the > keyboard, but that’s superficial. They are not semantically the same thing. > > When speaking a domain name like “www.iana.org” out loud, no one says > “period” for the dots. Still, this is just informal usage. The definitive > source for the right terminology to use is the DNS RFCs. > > This morning I decided I should check to see what terminology other DNS RFCs > use, since that is clearly the right precedent that this DNS RFC should > follow. After some reading, I do think that “dot” is the correct IETF DNS > terminology. > > RFC 1034 (DNS Concepts and Facilities) > > When a user needs to type a domain name, the length of each > label is omitted and the labels are separated by dots ("."). > Since a complete domain name ends with the root label, this > leads to a printed form which ends in a dot. > > RFC 1035 (DNS Implementation and Specification) > > <domain-name>s make up a large share of the data in the master > file. The labels in the domain name are expressed as character > strings and separated by dots. Quoting conventions allow > arbitrary characters to be stored in domain names. Domain names > that end in a dot are called absolute, and are taken as complete. > Domain names which do not end in a dot are called relative > > RFC 9499 (DNS Terminology) > > Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN): This is often just a clear way > of saying the same thing as "domain name of a node", as outlined > above. However, the term is ambiguous. Strictly speaking, a > fully qualified domain name would include every label, including > the zero-length label of the root; such a name would be written > "www.example.net." (note the terminating dot). > > Nowhere in those RFCs do I see any mention of the DNS dot being called > “period” or “full stop”. > > I think that RFC 9665 should be consistent with the existing DNS RFCs. > > Here is some updated suggested text: > > Strictly speaking, fully qualified domain names end with a dot ("."). > In DNS zone files and other similar contexts, if the final dot is > omitted, then a name may be treated incorrectly as relative to some > other parent domain. This document follows the formal DNS > convention, ending fully qualified domain names with a dot. > When this document mentions domain names such as "local." and > "default.service.arpa.", the final dot is part of the domain name; > it is not a period indicating the end of the sentence. > > Stuart Cheshire > -- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
