Defining the existence of non-existent domains

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

 



It seems to me that if we think it's a good idea to specify a domain
name that doesn't exist, we're better off clarifying the status of the
ones already specified rather than inventing new ones.  Since the
people who manage .ARPA are the exact same people who manage the root
(IANA, operated by ICANN, in both cases), one is as likely to flake as
the other.

In fact, ICANN is quite aware of the reserved names list.  In the
current draft of the application process, one of the steps is to
check to see if a proposed name is one of the Reserved ones, in which
case the application fails immediately.  Here's their reserved list:

 AFRINIC      IANA-SERVERS NRO
 ALAC         ICANN        RFC-EDITOR
 APNIC        IESG         RIPE
 ARIN         IETF         ROOT-SERVERS
 ASO          INTERNIC     RSSAC
 CCNSO        INVALID      SSAC
 EXAMPLE*     IRTF         TEST*
 GAC          ISTF         TLD
 GNSO         LACNIC       WHOIS
 GTLD-SERVERS LOCAL        WWW
 IAB          LOCALHOST
 IANA         NIC

 *Note that in addition to the above strings, ICANN will reserve
 translations of the terms "test" and "example" in multiple
 languages. The remainder of the strings are reserved only in the form
 included above.

(That's ICANN's footnote.)

Nonetheless, it occurs to me that the set of DNS names that are
reserved or that have special meanings in some protocols are scattered
over a lot of different RFCs. So I wrote a strawman to collect them
all in one place and make a registry of them:

   draft-levine-reserved-names-registry-00.txt

I think I got all the names, I did some greps over all of the text
RFCs looking for things that resembled domain names, and I looked to
see what's actually in .ARPA and the root.

If other people agree that it's a good idea to have a place that IANA
can point to for the reserved names, I'd be happy to move this ahead.
Or if we think the situation is OK as it is, we can forget about it.
But I see little wisdom in adding another does-not-exist name with
semantics not meaningfully different from .INVALID or FOO.INVALID.

R's,
John


_______________________________________________
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]