Re: [DNSOP] .arpa

On Mar 26, 2017, at 10:47 PM, George Michaelson wrote: > If there is a technical requirement for a label, it has to be > very very strong to require a new reference in the "." anchored > namespace. But the reason you feel this way is that such allocations would preclude gTLD

Re: [DNSOP] .arpa

I really have a problem with "that it is not representative of what is happening" -I mis-wrote to Ray, regarding how I believed he was characterizing OpenWRT code. How am I meant to interpret what you wrote here? Why am I not expected to respond, that is squatting in the face of a discussion about

Re: [DNSOP] .arpa

On Mar 26, 2017, at 9:51 PM, George Michaelson wrote: > I was thinking about the 'because its the (D)arpa" opposition when I > said that. I think *that* stated reason, is mostly now, a phantom. > Maybe I'm wrong on that too. Maybe its a giant political layer9 > football which

Re: [DNSOP] .arpa

I was thinking about the 'because its the (D)arpa" opposition when I said that. I think *that* stated reason, is mostly now, a phantom. Maybe I'm wrong on that too. Maybe its a giant political layer9 football which will come back to haunt us, forever. Given how much of the planet happily goes into

Re: [DNSOP] .arpa

On Mar 26, 2017, at 7:36 PM, George Michaelson wrote: > Its only my personal opinion, but I think the opposition to use of > .ARPA is almost entirely fictive at this point. I take it that since this is just your personal opinion, we need not discuss it any further? Forgive

Re: [DNSOP] .arpa

On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 7:54 PM, David Conrad wrote: > Hi, > > On Mar 26, 2017, 5:37 PM -0700, George Michaelson , wrote: > > In no sense is the domain solely used or intended for PTR requests, > > > Is anyone claiming this? If so, that'd be really silly

Re: [DNSOP] .arpa

Hi, On Mar 26, 2017, 5:37 PM -0700, George Michaelson , wrote: > In no sense is the domain solely used or intended for PTR requests, Is anyone claiming this? If so, that'd be really silly given the contents of the .ARPA zone is: as112.arpa. e164.arpa. in-addr-servers.arpa.

Re: [DNSOP] .arpa

Its only my personal opinion, but I think the opposition to use of .ARPA is almost entirely fictive at this point. In no sense is the domain solely used or intended for PTR requests, and I have successfully operated domains which vest A, and TXT records in the zone. Its just a string of

Re: [DNSOP] .arpa

+1 to all from frmr usgovie. We ain't that clever. On Wednesday, March 22, 2017, Jim Reid wrote: > > > On 21 Mar 2017, at 14:53, Suzanne Woolf > wrote: > > > > RFC 3172 was written in 2001… > > RFC 3172 was an attempt to rewrite

Re: [DNSOP] .arpa

In article you write: >> the last updated was made in 2013, right? > >The text of the document did not change. The date appears to be an artifact of >a change to the datatracker >database or tools, not the content or status of the underlying

Re: [DNSOP] .arpa

> On Mar 26, 2017, at 11:17 AM, Ozgur Karatas wrote: > > Hello, > > 22.03.2017, 10:05, "Jim Reid" : >>> On 21 Mar 2017, at 14:53, Suzanne Woolf wrote: >>> >>> RFC 3172 was written in 2001… > > the last updated was made in

[DNSOP] scribes, slides, and other logistics for DNSOP WG meeting at IETF 98

Hi all, Our meeting is Monday this time: DNSOP 13:00-15:00, room Zurich D If you’re presenting, your slide deck should be visible at https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/98/materials. If you sent us slides and they’re not there, please remind us ASAP; if you didn’t send us slides,

[DNSOP] [Errata Verified] RFC8027 (4877)

The following errata report has been verified for RFC8027, "DNSSEC Roadblock Avoidance". -- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=8027=4877 -- Status: Verified Type:

Re: [DNSOP] .arpa

Hello, 22.03.2017, 10:05, "Jim Reid" : >>  On 21 Mar 2017, at 14:53, Suzanne Woolf wrote: >> >>  RFC 3172 was written in 2001… the last updated was made in 2013, right? Regards, Ozgur ___ DNSOP mailing