2. Names handled through mutant DNS which can returns IP addresses (.local, .localhost, .homenet/.home.arpa)
I think it's clear that nobody has ever shown signs of wanting to anchor anything like this under .ARPA if it's a name that a user might ever have to see. The reason we might imagine we can persuade some people in the future to do so anyway is presumably because the IET has some authority to nudge them in that direction, not because there's some component of the situation that is DNS-protocol-like.
I agree about names a user might see, but at this point I'm scratching my head wondering if there will ever be another .onion. If someone wants a new set of non-DNS names intended to be used in web browsers, make it a new URI scheme.
In retrospect, .onion would better have been an onion: scheme. It is my impression that the reason it looks like a TLD is that it was easier to hack it into a SOCKS proxy than into a browser.
Regards, John Levine, jo...@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
