Its only my personal opinion, but I think the opposition to use of .ARPA is almost entirely fictive at this point. In no sense is the domain solely used or intended for PTR requests, and I have successfully operated domains which vest A, AAAA and TXT records in the zone. Its just a string of characters under a prefix.
The useful quality of the prefix is that it was grandfathered in, and its vested solely and wholly within agencies which are bound to our process and behaviour norms. Many of the questions over RFC6761 simply don't apply in .ARPA. There is no problem statement because there is no problem. Like all zones of grandfathers age, zone update and publication is a bit more arcane than we might want, but thats a surmountable problem. I would far rather see ALT.arpa and notDNS.arpa and even xn--ls8h.arpa than almost any other alternative right now. I have absolutely no problem with HOME.arpa and HOMENET.arpa I expect almost all of the responses to be human- behaviour ones, which go to "I don't like it because" so I feel no compunction saying I do like it. I particularly like that we don't actually have to do very much beyond note it, and ask IANA to operate a registry for it. -G On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 7:12 PM, Richard Lamb <sl...@xtcn.com> wrote: > +1 to all from frmr usgovie. We ain't that clever. > > > > On Wednesday, March 22, 2017, Jim Reid <j...@rfc1035.com> wrote: >> >> >> > On 21 Mar 2017, at 14:53, Suzanne Woolf <suzworldw...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > RFC 3172 was written in 2001… >> >> RFC 3172 was an attempt to rewrite history and contrive an acronym: >> Address and Routing Parameter Area - really? >> >> > Respectfully, I’ve always wondered who has this problem (US or non-US) >> > besides network infrastructure geeks Of a Certain Age (yes, including >> > myself, and many IETF participants). >> >> It's a convenient tool for those hostile to USG "control" of the Internet: >> ie the US military is responsible for everything under .arpa, the US >> military's ARPA has still got some special status in the >> operation/development/control of the Internet, etc, etc. [And say things >> like "if .arpa isn't for US military control, why can't the string be >> changed?" or ".arpa hasn't been renamed since the Internet started 25-30 >> years ago. That proves ARPA/DoD is in charge of the Internet.".] It's utter >> nonsense of course. But that doesn't stop government officials and >> policymakers from making these arguments. I have seen them do this many >> times. Sigh. RFC3172 didn't make things better. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> DNSOP mailing list >> DNSOP@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
