Actually that's a community that I would expect to know exactly what all those
terms mean and
how they are all related.
yes. But it's worse than that. The current language is not
automatically clear even for folk with good knowledge about DNS
administration.
As is being noted, I too think a great deal of the problem is
over-reliance on the word register.
It is being used as if it explains a basic difference in administrative
roles. It doesn't. Not even close.
To work with the example you gave here, I agree that "facebook.com" is registered (under
"com"), but
disagree that "www.facebook.com" is registered at all;
Right, of course it's not.
I disagree. Strongly. The fact that one registration is internal and
another is through a third-party, semi-regulated service does not make a
difference, for the use of that word.
I work with an organization that has an IT department that is just as
formal typical ICANN-authorized registries. To get a sub-domain is a
Very Big Deal. Don't think for a moment that it is fundamentally
different than interacting with the TLD registeries.
I didn't say that it is: I said that
people who don't fully understand this stuff *think* it is, and that's
the part that the text isn't making clear.
To my mind, "register" involves a specific transaction, sometimes involving
money, with whoever gates
access to make those delegations.
How much do you pay to register to vote?
However the rest of the above statement is correct. A transaction to
record gain access to a resource or to reserve access to it.
Registration is a process of signing up. That's all. And it says
nothing about the role or relationship of the entity the registration is
with.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
dcroc...@gmail.com
408.329.0791
Volunteer, Silicon Valley Chapter
American Red Cross
dave.crock...@redcross.org
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
