On Tue, 15 Jun 2021, Shumon Huque wrote:
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 12:46 PM Tim Wicinski <tjw.i...@gmail.com> wrote:Yes, Stephane, we were envisioning recommending an underscore label. Of course, that leads to how to avoid collisions in that space, and whether we need to establish a registry of application service names. You mean, a different registry than this one https://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-parameters/dns-parameters.xhtml#underscored-globally-scoped-dns-node-names tim Tim - yes, I think this would be a bit different. The above is for IETF defined protocols. This one (if we think it's a good idea) would have to encompass arbitrary Internet application services, many that could be proprietary services of companies.
<hat> I am one of the underscored-globally-scoped-dns-node-names Experts The _underscore registry is "Expert Review" only, meaning it is not only used for IETF defined protocols. It's only goal is to be a place where people can register a unique name to avoid name collision between different protocols/applications using it. As such, it would be fine for this draft to commend registration there. It could also start its own _underscore registry. </hat> Of course, if people ensure the names they use are somehow linked to their product of business name, it becomes fairly unique to begin with, and a registry might not be needed. Like people shouldn't be using _registration or _website_auth or something generic like that. My personal preference would be to focus stronger on generating proper names (and embedded expire / recurring check within the name) that would ensure no central registry of any kind would be needed. Paul _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
