On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Ray Hunter <[email protected]> wrote:

> Isn't it possible to combine the two ideas of sitelocal. with
> pseudo-domains generated from ULA to give a usable solution?
>
> e.g. fridge.<pseudo-ula-domain>.**sitelocal.
>
> Two points.  As I mentioned at the mic yesterday, this maps onto the
ULA distribution problem.  You'd either have to identify a deterministic
"root" ULA for this "zone" or guarantee that multiple such zones within
a given site all appear as being "on-site".  Second, is the unique string
part of the name or a zone of the domain?  mDNS recommends that all
host names in .local. appear as a flat namespace, but this is only a
recommendation.  We humans started using surnames some time ago
to disambiguate our identities regardless of location (although I note that
many such attempts were of the form "O'There").


> Don't you then avoid the evilness of identifier overloading (my fridge
> versus your fridge) and potential problems with clashing TLD's?
> e.g. someone registering a bunch of <pseudo-ula-domain>. TLD records as
> their company brand for manual administration.
>
> How else are homenet devices going to know not to bother the root servers
> with fridge.<pseudo-ula-domain>. NS queries given that TLD's are now
> basically a free for all?
>
> I think this is a darned good point.  It saves every resolver from having
to parse ".local-<mumble>." to decide whether it should delegate or not.


> Wouldn't it also potentially give a unique anchor point for storing DNSSEC
> zone signing with an implicit sitelocal. trust anchor?
>
> An even better point.

-K-


> regards,
> RayH
>
>
>
> Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>
>> Synthesise a pseudo-TLD from the ULA prefix.
>>
>>      Brian
>>
>
>
>
>
> Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>
>> On 01/08/2012 05:48, Curtis Villamizar wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>> fridge.sitelocal. is a FQDN with site local scope.
>>>
>>
>> And therefore intrinsically evil, just like 10.0.0.0/8 is intrinsically
>> evil.
>>
>> IMHO we shouldn't be discussing how to make it work less badly; we should
>> be discussing how to avoid it entirely.
>>
>>      Brian
>>
>>  ______________________________**_________________
> homenet mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/homenet<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet>
>
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Reply via email to