As a side-note, we started discussion on the DNSOP WG mailing list, but are happy to take suggestions in other places. And we again note that this is very preliminary document. (You, John, know how "very preliminary" drafts of terminology works out from our earlier work on RFC 6365.) On Nov 28, 2014, at 9:02 AM, John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote: > I am delighted that someone is finally taking this on in a > serious way. I find it interesting that the two terms that I > believe are most often abused -- "host" and "hostname" do not > seem to be covered. If you can't come up with reasonable > definitions for them, I think you should at least warn against > their unqualified use. Noted for the next draft, definitely. > Also, there is a DNS terminology discussion (and a rant about > the issues with sloppy terminology) in the now-expired > draft-klensin-dotless-terminology-harmful-00 I've been trying > to find time to revise it somewhat and see if the ISE would > publish it, but, if you want to adapt some of those ideas and/or > text, I'd be delighted. We'll definitely take a look. The result will likely be less satirical than what is there, but we can probably glean some ideas. --Paul Hoffman