>
> > Mark Andrews wrote:
> >
> > > The Internet went to multi-label hostnames ~20 years ago.
> >
> > As noted in RFC 2821 as "one dot required" syntax, also
> > mentioned in RFC 3696. Recently *overruled* by 2821bis.
>
> There is a difference between allowing protocol to be used
> in a "local" only mode (single label) and a "global" mode
> (multi-label) and saying you must support single label in
> a global context.
>
> Single label names are local in scope. Attempting to use
> them in a global context does not work. As the names in
> "." get more interesting the probability of collisions with
> existing names goes up. Not many people choose two letter
> labels for the least significant parts of their host names
> unless they are choosing their initials.
>
> Museum on the other hand is a real English word. I'm sure
> you will find lots other uses of "museum" in the DNS. The
> same thing will happen with other TLD's as the rules are
> relaxed.
>
> Single label hostnames are not globally unique. They SHOULD
> NOT be used in a context where globally unique names are
> required.
>
> Mark
Additionally we have RFC 1535 warning about the consequences
of treating global address as local in a addition to choosing
a bad definition of local for a search list.
The reverse is equally true. Mail that was intended for a
local receipient may end up being delivered globally. Not
everyone in a organisation tracks the comings and goings
of local addresses.
The sender may not even be local if a .forward contains
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" and tld goes away locally.
Mark
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
