On 06/07/2017 09:18 AM, Walter H. wrote:
On 06.06.2017 21:47, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 06/06/2017 12:41 PM, Walter H. wrote:
On 06.06.2017 20:11, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 06/06/2017 04:56 AM, Walter H. wrote:
So .lan. can't be used.
> It can be used, just be aware that maybe someday in the future it
will have a different meaning.
you're kidding;
as it seems there is no defined TLD for exact this use ...
I'm not kidding. Why is it a problem?
> Otherwise, just pick some random short selection of characters.
It's really not that complicated.
I replied to this mail with:
if I interpret your reply correctly, I could also use just .waldi or
.waldinet?
and their reply was:
If it's only for internal network, you can use .waldi or .waldinet.
Exactly. If you prefer that, then even better.
today I found this:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-cheshire-homenet-dot-home/
as it seems, will .home declared as special domain for private use
similar to RFC1918 IP addresses ...
I've the solution, or does anybody see a bug?
I don't see any reason that you couldn't use that. My only concern is
that recursive/caching nameservers would 1) have to be configured not to
"phone home" to the root-servers for .home or 2) resolvers of the future
would have to be smart enough to not do that either.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
