> On Mar 22, 2017, at 3:05 AM, Jim Reid <j...@rfc1035.com> wrote: > >> On 21 Mar 2017, at 14:53, Suzanne Woolf <suzworldw...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> RFC 3172 was written in 2001… > > RFC 3172 was an attempt to rewrite history and contrive an acronym: Address > and Routing Parameter Area - really?
Well, no. I thought it wasn’t rewriting anything, but setting a future direction. (The backronym was cute or annoying, depending on your POV, but ultimately not that important.) > >> Respectfully, I’ve always wondered who has this problem (US or non-US) >> besides network infrastructure geeks Of a Certain Age (yes, including >> myself, and many IETF participants). > > It's a convenient tool for those hostile to USG "control" of the Internet: ie > the US military is responsible for everything under .arpa, the US military's > ARPA has still got some special status in the operation/development/control > of the Internet, etc, etc. So the answer to “Why not actually use it where it’s technically suitable” is essentially “installed base”? I don’t mean to sound flippant— I’m just trying to understand the view that there’s a bigger obstacle to using .arpa than there is to asking ICANN for a root zone entry and engaging with all of the resulting complexities. thanks, Suzanne _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
