The Special-Use Domain Names Problem Statement document unsurprisingly
contains a list of problems.
This was an unordered list of 21 problems, including descriptions and
While trying to write another draft referring to specific problems it
became clear that it would be much better to have this as a *numbered*
list, so that one can refer to specific problems and say thing like
"This helps address problem #17" instead of "This helps address the
problem in the list which begins with the text "foo bar baz"...
I have checked with my co-authors, the DNSOP chairs, IESG and
responsible AD, and have updated the document changing the list from
unordered to numbered (and adding "This is not an ordered list, it is
numbered merely to facilitate referencing specific problems:").
The consensus was that this is a purely editorial change, but please
scream if you disagree -- the document is on Thursday's telechat, and
Benoit is the responsible AD.
On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:56 PM, <internet-drafts(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org> wrote:
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations of the IETF.
Title : Special-Use Domain Names Problem Statement
Authors : Ted Lemon
Filename : draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps-07.txt
Pages : 29
Date : 2017-07-03
The Special-Use Domain Names IANA registry policy defined in RFC 6761
has been shown through experience to present unanticipated
challenges. This memo presents a list, intended to be comprehensive,
of the problems that have been identified. In addition it reviews
the history of Domain Names and summarizes current IETF publications
and some publications from other organizations relating to Special-
Use Domain Names.
The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
There are also htmlized versions available at:
A diff from the previous version is available at:
Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
DNSOP mailing list
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair