On 09/21/2016 11:30 PM, George Michaelson wrote:
> None of these named spaces would "fail" to work as sub-spaces of .ALT
> or .arpa or any other community-led IETF tech community managed label.
> 

All of them with a requirement for global uniqueness will fail with
.ALT, per .ALT draft.  Etc.

> you are bringing an assumption to the table: all things of world scale
> do not have to exist at the top of the worldwide name space.
>

I don't understand what you mean.  We come to the table saying: the
globally unique namespace of the Internet needs to recognize non-DNS
ways to resolve names, that are by technical design incompatible with
the delegation model of the DNS.  The way to do that, according to
RFC6761, is to put these non-DNS TLDs into a registry that tells DNS to
always send NXDOMAIN to tell the systems: no, that does not resolve with
the DNS.

> because its not at root a technology problem: its a name problem.
>

I think we have both.  The technical aspect I just formulated.  The
naming aspect so far boiled down to "Why X and not Y?", which indeed, is
not entirely technical (and the answer is: because it occurred like
that, and there's no name collision.)

Regards,

==
hk

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Reply via email to