> On Feb 4, 2017, at 4:46 AM, Ray Bellis <r...@bellis.me.uk> wrote: > > > > On 04/02/2017 02:13, Andrew Sullivan wrote: >> Right, that's always been the problem with using this _for the DNS_. >> Homenet has no choice in that, because the whole point of the homenet >> name is precisely to enable in-homenet DNS without reference to the >> global DNS. I think you're quite correct that we need to decide >> whether alt is to be used for those purposes. I'm not convinced >> that's so useful. > > If it turns out that we can't get the insecure delegation that we need > for .homenet, then I'd (personally) be reasonably happy with > .homenet.alt, except that the current proposals for the use of .alt > wouldn't seem to permit that.
The other question to keep in mind, perhaps particularly for HOMENET, is how long are you/we willing to wait? The IETF has no process for requesting a change to the root zone (it’s not one of the protocol parameter registries under the change control of the IETF) and ICANN has no process for evaluating such a request.. Generallly when iCANN is asked to do something for which they have no process, their answer is Yes; No; or “We have to think about that,” and it often takes years, particularly in the last case. (no hats, just lots of experience.) Suzanne _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
