On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 05:39:58PM -0400, Suzanne Woolf <[email protected]> wrote a message of 69 lines which said:
> 4. Publish documents on extensions or protocol maintenance to the DNS > Protocol, with a focus on the operational impacts of > such changes. Act as clearinghouse for discussion or provide advice to ADs > and other WGs on EDNS0 options, new RRTYPEs, DNSSEC, record > synthesis, or other mechanics of extending DNS to support other > applications. Do we all agree that it may cover, in the future, the work which is currently discussed on the dns-privacy mailing list? > 6. Publish documents that attempt to better define the overlapping > area among the public DNS root, DNS-like names as used in local or > restricted > naming scopes, and the 'special names' registry that IETF > manages, and how they will interact moving forward. Work in a > liaison capacity to ICANN to assist in this. I strongly dislike "the public DNS root" as if there were only one (technically, any root is a root and, for dnsop, it does not matter if it is the USG root or any other, the DNS operational issues are the same) and I dislike even more "DNS-like names", which seems to imply there are inferior names. www.foobar.local is a domain name, even if it is not resolved through the DNS. I suggest: Publish documents that attempt to better define the overlapping area among the DNS and other resolution protocols which use domain names (and may have gateways to the DNS), especially in the context of the 'special names' registry that IETF manages (RFC 6761). _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
