On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 06:07:17AM -0800,
The IESG <iesg-secretary@xxxxxxxx> wrote
a message of 23 lines which said:
> - 'Multicast DNS '
> <draft-cheshire-dnsext-multicastdns-08.txt> as an Informational RFC
I do not think that the publication of this document as it is would be
a good idea.
The main reason is that it reserves a Top-Level Domain (".local")
which is already used at many sites, without any sort of reasonable
process, except "we already decided to use it and deployed the code".
Unlike what the text of the I-D says in section 3.1, there is little
evidence that IETF can do so. Unless what happened with RFC 2606,
nothing indicates that IANA/ICANN or any other body agreed to the
"hijack".
The I-D also gives questionable advices such as using ".home" or
".lan" which are not (and for good reasons) in RFC 2606.
The only reasons given in the current discussion on ietf@xxxxxxxx are
"it is already deployed" and "we need such a protocol for the
dentist's office".
The first one is weak: certainly, it should not be possible for any
company to have a RFC just by deploying a protocol is has unilaterally
conceived. The IETF is not a Patent Office: it *does* check the
applications.
Also, the I-D is not a pure description of a deployed protocol. For
instance, it says "it is even more important to use DNSSEC or other
security mechanisms to ensure that the response is trustworthy" while
the current implementations have no such mechanism.
The second reason is also questionable since IETF already has RFC
4795, which is not mentioned even once in the I-D we are discussing!
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf