ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Last Call: draft-jabley-sink-arpa (The Eternal Non-Existence of SINK.ARPA (and other stories)) to BCP

2009-12-27 18:47:06

On 2009-12-27, at 13:07, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:

I don't get it. Are you saying that you think it's possible that someone will 
come along and overturn RFC 2606, and that that someone wouldn't overturn any 
.arpa-related rules?

I'm saying that the body that administers the root zone is not the IETF. Not 
being a policy person I don't have any specific fears, but I'll observe that 
the set of people who make policy that affects administration of the root zone 
has a fairly small intersection with the set of people who participate in the 
IETF.

(b) SINK.ARPA is a hostname whereas INVALID is not,

This is a strawman; every subdomain of .invalid, so 2606 provides something 
like 36^254 invalid hostnames.

OK, so in response to your third question of whether there's a difference in 
use between SINK.ARPA and LABEL-SET-OF-YOUR-CHOICE.INVALID, the difference is 
that the NXDOMAIN responses for those names come from root servers, and not 
from ARPA servers.

I appreciate that the set of ARPA servers and the set of root servers today are 
very nearly the same, but it is a difference.


Joe
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

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