ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Update of RFC 2606 based on the recent ICANN changes ?

2008-07-07 19:54:55


--YD3LsXFS42OYHhNZ
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 11:47:15AM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
=20
The site-dependent interpretation of the name is determined not by the
presence of dot within the name but its absence from the end.
=20
    No.  Please go and re-read RFC 921.

What a charming document.

I don't see anything in it that indicates a hierarchical name can't
consist of one level, though I see plenty of examples of 2-level names.
If you see text in there that I missed, I'm all ears.

I do see this in RFC 1035, though:

When a user needs to type a domain name, the length of each label is
omitted and the labels are separated by dots (".").  Since a complete
domain name ends with the root label, this leads to a printed form which
ends in a dot.  We use this property to distinguish between:

  - a character string which represents a complete domain name
    (often called "absolute").  For example, "poneria.ISI.EDU."

  - a character string that represents the starting labels of a
    domain name which is incomplete, and should be completed by
    local software using knowledge of the local domain (often
    called "relative").  For example, "poneria" used in the
    ISI.EDU domain.

Relative names are either taken relative to a well known origin, or to a
list of domains used as a search list.  Relative names appear mostly at
the user interface, where their interpretation varies from
implementation to implementation, and in master files, where they are
relative to a single origin domain name.  The most common interpretation
uses the root "." as either the single origin or as one of the members
of the search list, so a multi-label relative name is often one where
the trailing dot has been omitted to save typing.

That sounds a lot to me like "hk." is as global as "hk.com."

        "hk." is not a syntactically valid hostname (RFC 952).
        "hk." is not a syntactically valid mail domain.
        Periods at the end are not legal.

        RFC 1035 has *nothing* to do with defining what is legal
        as a hostname.

        Mark

--=20
Ted Faber
http://www.isi.edu/~faber           PGP: http://www.isi.edu/~faber/pubkeys.=
asc
Unexpected attachment on this mail? See http://www.isi.edu/~faber/FAQ.html#=
SIG
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews(_at_)isc(_dot_)org
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>