On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 3:57 PM Vladimír Čunát <vladimir.cunat+i...@nic.cz> wrote:
> On 11/21/19 8:26 AM, Paul Wouters wrote: > > for example if ICANN delegates .zzz there will be interesting typo > attacks possible in this weird private space > > In this respect .zz is at least better than .xx which was among the > suggestions. > > > Finally, I agree. People want something semantic and more pronounceable.. > > I don't think it's possible to satisfy completely all potential use > cases with a single name. Desire for being short was also stated by > multiple people. > The draft specifically disclaims the semantic/pronounceable aspect. IMHO, there is *no* reason not to advance both .zz and .internal: - .zz (for general non-human use cases, like automatically generating locally scoped, globally unique names, a use case I have for resolver/forwarder identity) - .internal (for humans) Or basically, for the pronounceable use case, keep that separate and do in another place, don't really care where/how (e.g. .internal.arpa or ..local.arpa or whatever). If the delegation is to AS112, I think the typo attacks become a diminishing issue. Not sure, though. Brian
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
