Dear colleagues, Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in.
On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 01:07:28PM -0500, Tom Barrett wrote:
Organizations often operate multiple domains (primary site, legacy names, defensive registrations, verified-TLD names), with no standard way for an owner to declare which ones belong together.
I had a look at the draft, though I didn't read the proposal details carefully, concentrating on the motivation. The first thing I would ask the authors is whether they had a look at the DBOUND effort (and failure) in the 2015 or 2016 time frame? I might have a look at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sullivan-dbound-problem-statement/ as well as an attempted revival https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-tjw-dbound2-problem-statement/. There's also https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-deccio-dbound-name-relationships/, https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-deccio-dbound-organizational-domain-policy/, https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-levine-dbound-dns/. The origins of the DBOUND work might be found in https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sullivan-domain-policy-authority/ and the drafts it replaced (there were several ideas I tried out none of which got any real traction). It looks to me like https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-yao-dbound-identify-dns-boundary/ continued to be developed (my view originally was that that draft continued a line that I'd already tried out and rejected, but this is why we try out many different proposals.) Since then, there is another move afoot that seems relevant to me, only on the registration side: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-epp-same-entity/. That work appears to me to be mostly related to IDN variants in domain name registries, but the fundamental reasoning is (obviously) that there is some administrative link among the domains in the "same entity" set. People might be interested in similar work currently under public comment at ICANN: https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/initial-report-of-the-tsg-on-gtld-integrations-with-alternative-naming-systems-10-08-2026 I would be pleased to see this cluster of issues sorted out, and there's good reason to suppose that the email issues that (in my view) hijacked the concerns that occupied me at the time of DBOUND have been solved another way. So the proposal in this draft doesn't immediately cause me an allergic reaction; but given the history, it seems worth trying to deal with all that up front. Best regards, A -- Andrew Sullivan [email protected] _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
