On 2009-12-22, at 18:32, SM wrote:
> At 06:23 22-12-2009, Joe Abley wrote:
>
>> On 2009-12-22, at 11:33, SM wrote:
>>
>> The goal was to provide a set of additional requirements that the IAB would take into consideration when carrying out the duties as described in 3172. For example, some far future IAB might overlook that one obscure document amongst the 50,000 that exist specifies that SINK.ARPA should not exist, if that was the only place it was documented.
>>
>> The proposed IANA registry would be useful for such a future IAB in that it would list all the names that required special attention, together with a reference in each case to the document that described it.
>
> If that is the goal, the draft would have to register all the "arpa" sub-domains.
Why?
>> My reading of the text is consistent with the goal as described above. I would not object to further clarifying the goal by spelling out that the special criteria found via the new proposed registry do not trump the opinion of the IAB (i.e. the IAB can still say no, even if the criteria are all met).
>
> The procedures for registration are documented in Section 2.1 and Section 3.0 of RFC 3172.
Section 2.1 and 3.0 deal with delegations.
> You could reference those sections instead of having Section 5.0 and Section 5.1.
Not really, since the goal is to provide a framework for inserting other records into the ARPA zone apart from those associated with delegations.
> The main parts of this draft are about the eternal non-existence of sink.arpa. If the examples are removed, there isn't any text that explains the operational utility. I am not arguing for keeping the examples. The operational utility could be addressed by a project similar to AS112.
The purposes of the document under review is described fairly succinctly in section 1:
1. to create a new IANA registry called "ARPA Reserved Names" (see
Section 4);
2. to define the special considerations of a single name SINK.ARPA,
a name which is defined never to exist (see Section 2);
3. to allow the procedures by which the ARPA zone is maintained, as
documented in [RFC3172], to be modified for names present in the
ARPA Reserved Names registry according to the special
characteristics of those names (see Section 5).
Which of those three purposes are you suggesting the AS112 project could help with?
Joe
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf