On 21.10.22 18:48, Tim Wicinski wrote: > > > > > > Rather than placing "alt" in the TLD position, I think it might be better > > as a scheme modifier: https+alt://... This is a common pattern for > > modifications to URI schemes (c.f. git+ssh://), and informs the software > > that this URI is special without overloading the DNS namespace. > > > > > Not putting any hat on, I do like Ben's https+alt:// URI suggestion. > > As a chair, if we see enough interest in this, the WG should find consensus >
I am actually surprised by this as the primary concern reason for a possible conflict was that the names in GNS and DNS can be conflated by the user. Name notion of a "user expectation" for names was thrown around a lot. Using <scheme>+alt://example.com or <scheme>+gns://example.com is actually making it worse with respect to that aspect than .alt as SUTLD, no? It is as if we are chasing a moving target where the primary pont of contention always seems to escape us. The goalpost seems to be moving. BR > tim > _______________________________________________ > 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
