It appears that Peter Thomassen <[email protected]> said: > > >On 6/27/22 22:05, John Levine wrote: >> But there is a >> great deal of software that expects the names it uses to look like >> hostnames, and won't work with anything else. > >The software for new applications which would use a _foo pseudo-TLD namespace >is not yet written. It is for future applications, for which we >can hope to push TLD-like use of things like "onion" into namespaces like >"_onion".
History suggests that you and I will both be dead before that software is widely enough used for anyone to care. >I see no reason why, if Tor was started today, the software written for it >should not be able to support _onion, if that was the BCP for doing >it. Tor software would be written for that purpose at the time. Or am I >missing something here? The particular issue for .onion was SSL certificates which use an identifier with a syntax essentially the same as DNS hostnames. In theory, we could ask the SSL people to change the rules to allow _names, in practice, even if we could persuade the IETF to update the spec, it would take a long time for the changes to percolate out into the field. There is still plenty of software using TLS 1.1 which was published in 2006 and deprecated a year ago. You'd also need to update web browsers and the SOCKS proxies that are usually used to connect the TOR sessions to the browsers. How much time are you prepared to spend to persuade them all that they should allow _label as the rightmost label? R's, John _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
