Excerpts from Stephane Bortzmeyer's message of 2022-08-01 17:29:38 +0200:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 02:31:48PM +0200,
> Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear) wrote
> a message of 89 lines which said:
>
> > Whether that means using TLD labels that begin with _ or whether
> > that means
Hi,
Excerpts from Peter Thomassen's message of 2022-08-01 16:57:45 -0400:
>
> On 8/1/22 12:01, Paul Vixie wrote:
> >>
> >> I agree and I think publication of these drafts would be a good idea
> >> (may be with status Experimental since, as Joe Abley said, there is
> >> clearly no IETF
This is not an oversight (altough I have to admin it did not occur to me
that this a valid DNS TLD at the time of writing).
You can see in Section 7.1 that we also use "www.example.org" in the
draft.
We address the namespace topic in Section 9.9.
As mentioned, the draft currently goes all-in with
On 16.10.22 12:03, Brian Dickson wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 9:08 AM Eliot Lear wrote:
>
> > Hiya!
> >
> > Thanks to Suzanne and the chairs for moving things forward. On this point:
> > On 16.10.22 17:22, Warren Kumari wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> 2. Having the IETF maintain a registry of
On OCT17@07:11, Joe Abley wrote:
> On Oct 16, 2022, at 23:03, Christian Huitema wrote:
>
> > The main problem with "giraffe.org" and similar is that the subdomains are
> > leased, not owned. A glitch in the renewal, and they are grabbed by some
> > domain catcher and redirected to "my sexy
On 20.10.22 12:05, Brian Dickson wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 1:16 AM Eliot Lear wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > First, I would like us to continue to consult on the registry matter at
> > least through the London IETF, and would ask the chairs for some time in
> > London for this purpose. I would
On 20.10.22 01:31, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> (Well, *that* will teach me not to go on vacation and not look at work email.
> Or maybe I should do that more often!)
>
> > The chairs have gotten a couple of requests, off-list and on, for a WGLC on
> > draft-ietf-dnsop-alt-tld.
> >
> > We’ve reviewed
On 21.10.22 18:48, Tim Wicinski wrote:
> >
> >
> > Rather than placing "alt" in the TLD position, I think it might be better
> > as a scheme modifier: https+alt://... This is a common pattern for
> > modifications to URI schemes (c.f. git+ssh://), and informs the software
> > that this URI is
On 23.10.22 10:50, Suzanne Woolf wrote:
> Eliot,
>
> On Oct 23, 2022, at 2:15 AM, Eliot Lear mailto:l...@lear.ch>>
> wrote:
>
>
> On 23.10.22 05:40, John Levine wrote:
> It appears that Eliot Lear mailto:l...@lear.ch>> said:
> As a matter of practicality, a registry surely will be form. It
On OCT17@11:53, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Oct 2022, Eliot Lear wrote:
>
> > Let's please leave Internet lawyering to lawyers. If people want a
> > legal opinion on this draft, the IETF does have resources for that.
>
> But it is to the core of the ICANN / IETF divide, so IETF shouldn't
Hi,
FWIW: Triggered by the ADs mail on this ML and after re-reading -17 I would
like to make clear that the current draft looks pretty good to me with minor
nits as mentioned in this thread.
Br
Martin
Excerpts from Paul Hoffman's message of 2022-08-23 18:52:18 +:
> Thanks again for all the
s usability and is incompatible with applications that
expect domain names.
BR
[1] "that" being that alternative name systems are not welcome and are
required to bake into their technical specifications "poison pills" that
make them unattractive to use.
>
> Brian
>
>
I just read it and on page 5 it specifically excludes .onion and .gnu as
those do not use the DNS protocol (citing also the alt draft here).
So this is equivalent to the .alt draft only if the private-use TLD is
not limited to private-use DNS queries as investigated in the document.
I find this to
On 14.12.22 12:25, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Dec 14, 2022, at 11:29, Eliot Lear wrote:
> >
> >
> > We're off in the woods again. Let's keep these two principles in mind:
> >
> > The DNS resolution mechanisms are not expected to resolve, let alone secure
> > names ending in .ALT.
> > How
On 14.12.22 10:19, Joe Abley wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 10:08, Martin Schanzenbach
> wrote:
>
> > "Developers are wholly responsible for dealing with any collisions"
> >
> > I think this is an impossible task and as a develop
Hi Paul,
the draft lgtm. But, the passage regarding collisions because of
the missing registry now contains a regression IMO:
"Developers are wholly responsible for dealing with any collisions"
I think this is an impossible task and as a developer that is addressed
here I have to say that we
On 08.11.22 10:42, Eliot Lear wrote:
> As mentioned in the dnsop meeting the proposed change would be to remove the
> following sentences in Section 2:
>
> OLD:
>
>Alternative namespaces should differentiate themselves from other
>alternative namespaces by choosing a name and using it in
17 matches
Mail list logo
