Re: Last Call: draft-cheshire-dnsext-multicastdns (Multicast DNS) to Informational RFC

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

 



I don't think the IESG or ICANN should go there, or anywhere close.

There are three options:

1) Do not reserve .local. This would effectively mean throwing out the
draft as it depends on .local

2) Reserve .local for this particular protocol. This would be
inconsistent with current legacy use and is neither necessary, nor
appropriate.

3) IESG, IANA and ICANN note that by longstanding convention .local is
already allocated for the purpose of local DNS configuration. Then the
IESG notes that this draft specifies an example of such use and that
requires appropriate wording in the draft to note that deployments
must be aware that usage may not be consistent.


There is a final option which would be that devices receive the
default domain name that they are to use for configuration as part of
the DHCP protocol and that this can be overriden. This seems rather
more logical to me than declaring a magic number and considerably more
flexible.

I want my personal machines to be part of the .hallambaker.com DNS
domain and look for configuration data there. I want my business
machines to be part of the .defaultdenysecurity.com domain and look
for configuration data there.

On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:27 AM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 04:21:02PM -0800, SM wrote:
>>
>>   "Note that this use of the ".local." suffix falls under IETF/IANA
>>   jurisdiction, not ICANN jurisdiction."
>>
>> This draft mentions that the IETF has the authority to instruct IANA to
>> reserve pseudo-TLDs as required for protocol design purposes.  There is
>> no action requested from IANA for ".local" in the IANA Considerations
>> section.
>
> There is in fact a request, it's just made indirectly.  That was my
> complaint.
>
> I'm aware that the draft claims this is an IETF/IANA responsibility
> and not an ICANN one.  I'm not sure I'm convinced, and I think the
> IESG should take that into account when making their decision about
> the draft.  But I don't think it's a reason to hold it up anyway.
>
> A
>
> --
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shinkuro, Inc.
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@xxxxxxxx
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>



-- 
-- 
New Website: http://hallambaker.com/
View Quantum of Stupid podcasts, Tuesday and Thursday each week,
http://quantumofstupid.com/
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
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]