On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 4:24 AM, Joe Abley <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 2014-02-12, at 11:28, Marc Blanchet <[email protected]> wrote: > > > - I like better that approach than the previous draft registering many > tlds. > > The previous draft (at least for some of the TLDs) was anchored in the > reality that changing the name already in use was not practical, e.g. > there's a sufficient deployed base that uses DNS-like names ending in ONION > that proposals to use things like ONION.ARPA were non-starters. > I dissent from this view. I strongly disagree with any characterisation of the problem of code replacement in service being intractable, and I think it is a false premise. I realize I am probably a lone voice on this, but at *no* time have I felt the "there are too many already" argument has merit, and it has materially impeded several outcomes we now face, because of failure to accept the necessary transition pain. The future is always bigger. > I think therefore that the ALT draft addresses quite a different problem: > the choice of DNS-like (but not DNS) name structure for new applications > that we don't know about yet. > And as a consequence I disagree with this too. An orderly migration from .ONION to another namespace is both feasible and capable of being planned for. -G
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
