I have used computers that do not allow geeks to type things. They suck, not only for me, but for my parents when I am trying to support them. The homenet naming architecture document I wrote goes into great detail about why it is a terrible idea to hide information from the user, from a security perspective. If you disagree with that, I'd be curious to know why. My experience is that users notice when things change, and so showing them precisely what data you are operating on, and having that data be nominally comprehensible, is a substantial benefit, even if they don't have a correct mental model for what the data means.
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 9:00 AM, Michael Richardson <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ted Lemon <[email protected]> wrote: > > It has to be possible to type it. "hm.arpa" would be amusing. > > Why does it have to be typed? Because geeks might have to type it? > I typed it in my email by using copy and paste from a browser. > (It doesn't even display in Emacs correctly, which is my MUA, btw. I see a > box with 01F3EO in it) > > Being hard to type seems like an advantage for a zone that we never want to > be seen at all. If it's hard for geeks to type, then whenever we find > ourselves having to type it, we'd know that it had leaked in a bad way. > > But, my technical question wasn't answered: > > > And we could have something as ridiculously short as "h.arpa", right? > > Could we have: 🏠.arpa ? > > I'm not asking if we should use it, I'm asking if we could use it. > > -- > Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works > -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- > > > > > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet > _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
