Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

On 9/21/15, 16:36, "DNSOP on behalf of hellekin" wrote: >-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >Hash: SHA512 > >On 09/21/2015 11:50 AM, Edward Lewis wrote: >> >> I think defining -whether- name.onion is a Domain Name will make us >> re-think

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

Hi Stephane, On 21 Sep 2015, at 11:20, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 12:19:26PM -0400, Joe Abley wrote a message of 111 lines which said: Whether or not we should call an onion or mdns name a "domain name" or something else is just a detail. I don't

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 07:58:54PM +, Edward Lewis wrote a message of 145 lines which said: > >Abstract: > >This document states a definition of Domain Name beyond the use of > >the term within the Domain Name System. Very good document, IMHO, and useful. I

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

Your example has some problems for me. Problems which I guess your question was designed to draw out. Firstly, *some* tor active clients operate by using bump-in-the-stack methods based or analogous to SOCKS. So, there is an API which intervenes on the normal operations and tunnels, and then its

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

Edward Lewis wrote: > > It seems to me that a new layer of software is emerging between the UI and > the stub resolver, one that will need to know where to send a name > resolution query. What do you mean "is emerging"? The name service switch was introduced over 20 years

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 12:19:26PM -0400, Joe Abley wrote a message of 111 lines which said: > Whether or not we should call an onion or mdns name a "domain name" > or something else is just a detail. I don't think agreeing on the > answer is going to solve any of the

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > If you want a nice example of a domain name which is not a DNS name, > add in your /etc/hosts (or equivalent for your OS): > > 104.20.1.85 >

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

On 9/18/15, 12:51, "DNSOP on behalf of Jim Reid" wrote: > >On 18 Sep 2015, at 17:19, Joe Abley wrote: > >> Whether or not we should call an onion or mdns name a "domain name" or >>something else is just a detail. I don't

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 07:58:54PM +, Edward Lewis wrote a message of 145 lines which said: > >Name:draft-lewis-domain-names > >Revision:00 If you want a nice example of a domain name which is not a DNS name, add in your /etc/hosts (or

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 09/21/2015 11:50 AM, Edward Lewis wrote: > > I think defining -whether- name.onion is a Domain Name will make us > re-think how Domain Names interoperate amongst protocols beyond the DN S. > Agreed, but why limit to .onion? Can your example

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

Hi George! On 18 Sep 2015, at 12:58, George Michaelson wrote: > Ed wrote a draft whose purpose claimed to be definitional around what > domain names are. In that context I replied. If you don't really care how > we use words, thats fine too. I don't think that's a reasonable summary of what I

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

If they nest, then yes. if the x. under onion is hash denoted only for other reasons, but otherwise is a truly encompassing domain, then yes. If it has a SOA. and NS, and there is a clear zonecut, its not just a domain, its a DNS domain. But we know that isn't how its going to work: this is a

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

On 9/17/15, 17:03, "DNSOP on behalf of Darcy Kevin (FCA)" wrote: >Ed, > I find the document useful, and illuminating, but that it suffers from >one glaring omission -- no substantive discussion of the relationship >between

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

> On Sep 18, 2015, at 14:16, George Michaelson wrote: > > My private comment bears repeating in public. > > DOMAIN names is about the property of domains. Domains are encompassing, > set-theory/venn-diagram style. A domain and a prefix are analogous concepts. > One is

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

My private comment bears repeating in public. DOMAIN names is about the property of domains. Domains are encompassing, set-theory/venn-diagram style. A domain and a prefix are analogous concepts. One is expressed syntactically somehow, the other is a mathematical property of bounding in a number

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

I think its possible I'm arguing off to the side Ed. But, there was a scoping quality in domain, as applied to domain names, which is pretty "big" in my opinion. Its analogous to the ordering issues in fully qualified (relative) distinguished names in X.500. The order of elements of Surname=

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

>> So it's IMO fine to say ".onion addresses are case-insensitive and >> will comply with existing DNS limitations for label lengths (63) and >> maximum fqdn lengths (253ish)". >> Which contradicts draft-lewis-domain-names-00 > > > So - and not to be pointed - but in your email I reference,

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

On 9/18/15, 9:16, "George Michaelson" wrote: >My private comment bears repeating in public. That's good... >DOMAIN names is about the property of domains. Domains are encompassing, >set-theory/venn-diagram style. A domain and a prefix are analogous >concepts. One is

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

On 9/18/15, 9:54, "Alec Muffett" wrote: > > I feel this may need clarification in your section on Tor addressing. Perhaps > it's not **really** domain-naming, but it **looks** much more like it. The first point of the document is to allow us to answer that "perhaps" - without a

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

On 18 Sep 2015, at 17:19, Joe Abley wrote: > Whether or not we should call an onion or mdns name a "domain name" or > something else is just a detail. I don't think agreeing on the answer is > going to solve any of the problems that we actually have +1

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

Ed wrote a draft whose purpose claimed to be definitional around what domain names are. In that context I replied. If you don't really care how we use words, thats fine too. I agree it won't alter anything and I want to stop here, since I suspect I'm already well on the way to hitting peoples

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

On 18 Sep 2015, at 9:54, Alec Muffett wrote: >> On Sep 18, 2015, at 14:16, George Michaelson wrote: >> >> My private comment bears repeating in public. >> >> DOMAIN names is about the property of domains. Domains are encompassing, >> set-theory/venn-diagram style. A domain

[DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

Don't know if this will be posted to DNSOP some other way. (I've gotten one private comment, so it's been announced somewhere, someway.) On 9/17/15, 13:50, "internet-dra...@ietf.org" wrote: >Name: draft-lewis-domain-names >Revision: 00 >Title:

Re: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt

e more restrictive terms 'URL' and 'URN'". -Original Message- From: DNSOP [mailto:dnsop-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Edward Lewis Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2015 3:59 PM To: dnsop Subject: [DNSOP] draft-lewis-domain-names-00.txt Don't know if this will be posted to DNSOP some other w