Ted:
> There are other processes for adding names to the root zone. In my opinion,
> using the special-use TLD registry as a means of putting a name, even one
> that has a different scope and use case, is an end run around that process.
>
> So it seems to me that your position is not that it's inappropriate for a
> name to both be registered in the root zone and in the special-use names
> registry, but rather that two processes would have to be followed in order
> for this to happen. Is that a reasonable interpretation of what you have
> said?
No. In my opinion, the special-use TLD registry is not appropriate for the
assignment of any name that will appear in the root zone. As I said in my
first note, my view is that TLDs assigned through the special-use registry MUST
NOT be published in the root zone.
If you have a domain names that is to appear in the root zone, then the
existing process ought to be used for that to happen.
Further, the intent is that .homenet will be used with the DNS protocol.
Section 3 of the document makes it very clear that users, applications,
resolution APIs, and most resolvers will not to treat that domain name in a
special in any way. For this reason, I do not think it meets the definition of
a special-use domain name in RFC 6761, which says:
... if a domain name has special properties that affect the
way hardware and software implementations handle the name, that apply
universally regardless of what network the implementation may be
connected to, then that domain name may be a candidate for having the
IETF declare it to be a Special-Use Domain Name and specify what
special treatment implementations should give to that name.
So, I think that the desired outcome requires the use of the existing process
to get it registered in the root zone and some standards-track RFC to describe
the environment where:
… Only a DNS server that is authoritative for the root ('.') or is
configured to be authoritative for '.homenet' or a subdomain of
'.homenet' will ever answer a query about '.homenet.’
Steve Crocker has already stated that he does not believe that entries that
cannot be DNSSEC signed belong in the DNS root zone. I know that others share
this view. For this reason, I do not think that the IETF should approve a
document that specifies this processing until the root zone publication process
is successful.
Russ
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
