In message <92D1093C43E4FBD3032A5B7B(_at_)PST(_dot_)JCK(_dot_)COM>, John C
Klensin writes:
--On Saturday, January 24, 2009 21:02 -0500 Keith Moore
<moore(_at_)network-heretics(_dot_)com> wrote:
IMHO, there should be an RFC explaining that use of a TLD as a
terminal domain name was never intended to work, and should
not be expected to be supported by the Internet architecture
or software.
You know where to find the virtual pencil. I would certainly
support such a document, but the real support would need to come
from DNS folks.
john
How so? The DNS is a container to hold information. The
rules about that information are external to the DNS and
always have been.
One of the problems is lots of RFC's say "domain name" when
they are actually refering to a "hostname". This has
introduced lots of confusion.
RFC921 made it pretty clear that we were to stop using non-
heirachical names and that single labels were only ever to
be used as aliases for heirachical names.
Saying that non-heirachical names only have local scope and
are to not to be used for global scope addressing would be
a good thing. This leaves "localhost" in local scope.
Mark
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews(_at_)isc(_dot_)org