On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 1:29 PM Joe Abley <jab...@hopcount.ca> wrote:
> On 27 Jul 2021, at 16:15, John Levine <jo...@taugh.com> wrote: > > >> * Section 5: Promoted or orphan glue > >> The considerations for handling orphan glue will be different for a > >> TLD vs a lower level zone within a domain. I would think that orphan > >> glue in a TLD context should go away when a zone is deleted/expired. > >> Maybe even have sanity checking to prevent such an operation. > > > > This is a political question, not a technical one. If the DNS operator > > has external knowledge that the orphan's domain has not been delegated > > to someone else, you can make a case to leave the glue. The usual > > example is a name in a TLD which has expired but is still in the grace > period, > > but it can happen anywhere someone delegates names; I run registries > > at the third level like watkins-glen.ny.us. > > > > I don't see how we can offer any more than general and vague advice here. > > I agree, and I think the best plan is to remove any mention of it. Orphan > glue is by definition not glue. It once was glue, but that has no bearing > on how to craft a referral response. It's out of scope for this document. > > At best, I think the term "orphan glue" belongs in a taxonomy concerned > with registry terminology, not DNS terminology. And although one of the > ways in which domain registries publish information is in the DNS, it's > rarely a good idea to conflate the two. > > I'd like to point out a (now moot) nit to the original comment(s): Instead of TLD, it is probably more correct to refer to "Registry". E.g. in John L's response about operating a third-level Registry, it isn't a TLD but is still a Registry. (I only point this out so that in future, any commentary that starts out with someone writing "TLD", that they might correct themselves and write "Registry".) Brian
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
