On Tuesday, February 4, 2025 10:49:29 PM CET Kim Davies wrote: > Hi folks, > > We have published a new version of the draft intended to document the > .internal top-level domain. > (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-davies-internal-tld/) > When we presented this work in Dublin, there was a lot of discussion both in > the meeting, and subsequently, on whether this should be a work item and > also whether the domain merited consideration as a special-use domain name > per RFC 6761. I don’t think there was clear consensus on either, but to > further the discussion on the latter point, Warren Kumari has provided > strawman text to stimulate discussion. > kim
Hello! I appreciate that IANA is thinking about relegating a suffix like this for internal-only use. Currently, I have 3 major networks that use their own top-level suffixes. I'll list these below, along with rationale. - .lan (main network) The main network, that encapsulates all of my operational and research endeavours. It currently contains network services like 3x DNS and 2x DHCP (HA), as well as file servers, mail servers and whatnot. My website is also hosted in it. Its longest name is what I am currently emailing you from - workstation.vm.ideapad.lan. - .vpn (2x VPN network) The VPN networks that span both nations and infrastructure. They focus on the edge nodes e1.nixmagic.com and e2.nixmagic.com. My devices phone home through those network edges, and establish a global logical topology for both forward and reverse proxy-like network activity. - .sat (satellite network) Being a traveller, I don't just need road warrior devices - I need a replica of the .lan infrastructure as a skeleton wherever I go. That is not just for phoning home to the mothership, but assuming a skeleton of its responsibilities in the face of disruption too. I don't just travel for tourism, I do it for long-term exchange too. In that scenario, a return flight may well be weeks if not months away. That replication concern is what the satellite network exists for. Now, I could suffix this with .internal and call it a day. If anything, I would like to have a suffix like that. It would allow me to have a suffix that is decidedly internal, separating it from the nixmagic.com and other such domains I do also own. I don't want to tie these private networks to my public domains - if I wanted to do so, I would've already done it. Instead, I decided to tie my local networks to unused domain suffixes, as per the intel published by ICANN. Being a part of CZDS, also gave me intel on the resource allocation of public TLD zones. Some of them (like .org) are truly impressive. Given that, I do not want to have my networks send unnecessary traffic to the root servers. It is my responsibility to keep that internal, and to move if/ when ICANN decides to allocate these zones. Currently, .vpn seems the most likely contender to that. If/when that happens, I would be likely to seriously consider the other suffixes too. Regardless, it's not like a suffix change to all of them would be much more than the change to a handful of text files. As for this proposal, I would like to preemptively consider this for a .internal suffix. If that is a change to proceed into standardization, I would like to hear about it so that I can change my networks accordingly. -- Met vriendelijke groet, Michael De Roover Mail: [email protected] Web: michael.de.roover.eu.org _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
