Re: Update of RFC 2606 based on the recent ICANN changes ?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> 
> 
> --On Tuesday, 08 July, 2008 11:47 +1000 Mark Andrews
> <Mark_Andrews@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > 
> >> The site-dependent interpretation of the name is determined
> >> not by the presence of dot within the name but its absence
> >> from the end.
> > 
> > 	No.  Please go and re-read RFC 921.
> 
> This is the same RFC 921 that 
> 	
> 	* is listed in the RFC Index as "Status: UNKNOWN"

	Unknown doesn't mean irrelevent.
 
> 	* was not even examined in the "requirements" review
> 	that led up to RFC 1123 and is not referenced there.

	RFC 1123 -> RFC 952 -> RFC 921
 	
> 	* primarily talks about an implementation schedule and
> 	transition plan, not about long-term stable
> 	interpretations.

	
> Isn't claiming that as an authority in 2008 a bit of a stretch?

	No.  Old does not mean irrelevent.

> Especially since, as Ted Farber points out, text in 1035 itself
> seems to contradict your reading of that particular section?

	No.  RFC 1035 applies to domain names, not hostnames.
	
> I believe that 952 is almost equally irrelevant wrt this
> argument. YMMD, of course.

	RFC 952 is the latest rfc which defines the syntax of a
	hostname.

> As Keith points out, there are lots and lots of reasons to avoid
> believing that dot-less strings will be interpreted as domain
> names consistently and in the way that users will expect.  Most
> of them have to do with handling of names in applications, which
> tends to get strange in edge cases and stranger when one relies
> too much on having specific contents in resolver configuration
> files.  The mere fact of inconsistent (but valid)
> interpretations in different applications or configurations (or
> even implementations of the same 
> application) may be more than enough reason to avoid these
> things, or at least be very careful about them.  But claiming
> 921 as an authority isn't one of the reasons, IMO.
> 
>      john
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews@xxxxxxx
_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]