On 8/8/2022 2:24 PM, John Levine wrote:
It appears that Vittorio Bertola said:
1) Why should these people get for free something which everybody else is
required to pay $200'000 for?
Remember that $200K is just the starting point. Google paid $25M for
.APP, GMO paid $41M for .SHOP and Veri
Hiya,
I've scanned the draft and read the thread.
AFAICS the draft does not ask for a new 6761 (*) special use
name, so ISTM speculation as to what the authors or their
pals would be better off doing is moot. (I.e. there's no
point telling 'em to go away and come back asking to use
gnu.alt or w
On 8/8/2022 4:10 PM, John R. Levine wrote:
In any event, the underlying references make it quite clear why
Bernie's fixes are the right ones.
The citation was in the table once before, during document development.
And was then changed. Across the drafts, there were /three/ different
RFC n
I don't recall that anyone judged it incorrect. I think we just made a
clerical error.
absent a recollection -- or documentation -- the proffered assessment lacks a
basis.
I don't recall documentation or even recollection of why those entries
changed from one draft to the next. I do recal
On 8/8/2022 3:57 PM, John R. Levine wrote:
I don't recall that anyone judged it incorrect. I think we just made
a clerical error.
absent a recollection -- or documentation -- the proffered assessment
lacks a basis.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_
So, for example, why is this latest reference correct this time, when it was
judged incorrect, the last time is was used for the entry?
I don't recall that anyone judged it incorrect. I think we just made a
clerical error.
Regards,
John Levine, jo...@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The In
On 8/8/2022 2:03 PM, Warren Kumari wrote:
So, just to be clear, I'm approving all of these errata, yes?
As I noted privately, there is a history with this list of RFC
references that demonstrates something akin to whimsy, but, at the least
indicating a lack of a clear and shared basis for dec
So, just to be clear, I'm approving all of these errata, yes?
That's what I'd do.
On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 6:38 PM, John R. Levine wrote:
On Wed, 3 Aug 2022, Dave Crocker wrote:
Original Text
-
| URI | _acct | [RFC6118] |
Corrected Text
--
| URI | _acct | [RFC7566]
It appears that Vittorio Bertola said:
>1) Why should these people get for free something which everybody else is
>required to pay $200'000 for?
Remember that $200K is just the starting point. Google paid $25M for
.APP, GMO paid $41M for .SHOP and Verisign paid $135M for .WEB.
In my experience
So, just to be clear, I'm approving all of these errata, yes?
W
On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 6:38 PM, John R. Levine wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Aug 2022, Dave Crocker wrote:
>
> Original Text
> -
> | URI | _acct | [RFC6118] |
>
> Corrected Text
> --
> | URI | _acct | [RFC7566] |
>
>
On 08/08/2022 14.53, Jim Reid wrote:
How about having an IANA registry of these experimental TLDs? Those strings
don’t go in the root. And they don't get added to the IETF’s special use list
and ICANN is still free to create these TLDs if/when they decide to create
more. This hypothetical IANA
On 02/08/2022 14:22, Schanzenbach, Martin wrote:
So, we mostly separated the technical protocol design from the
namespace issue.
No such separation is possible - the DNS is the Domain Name _System_.
That _system_ is the combination of:
- the wire protocol
- the authoritative servers (from th
Paul Hoffman wrote on 2022-08-08 06:31:
On Aug 8, 2022, at 3:16 AM, Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear)
wrote:
...
draft-ietf-dnsop-alt-tld and SAC113 would give the authors of the draft you are
considering an easy method to do the type of naming they talk about in their
draft.
On Mon, 8 Aug 2022, John R Levine wrote:
It is not a viable choice outside of a few nerds who are fully capable of
getting a browser plug-in to handle gns:// URIs. Which would still allow
all DNS parsing libraries to be used on the names.
Sufficiently motivated people seem able to install
On Aug 8, 2022, at 3:16 AM, Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear)
wrote:
> The community has more choices than Christian indicated. One is that “You”
> carve out some space for namespaces like GNS, just as George suggested.
> Warren's draft seems to comport itself to contours of that c
It is not a viable choice outside of a few nerds who are fully capable of
getting a browser plug-in to handle gns:// URIs. Which would still allow all
DNS parsing libraries to be used on the names.
Sufficiently motivated people seem able to install whatever it is you need
to browse through To
> On 8 Aug 2022, at 11:16, Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear)
> wrote:
>
> I caution against those approaches that would set such a high bar that they
> would require researchers to fork out hundreds of thousands of dollars on
> application fees alone plus who knows how much else fo
On Aug 8, 2022, at 06:16, Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear)
wrote:
>
> Ease of deployment: ability to use whatever application and OS interfaces
> such as nsswitch.conf, a plugin in a browser, etc.
The only new use of nsswitch for the “hosts” entry within the last 20 years
that I k
On Aug 8, 2022, at 02:08, Christian Huitema wrote:
>
>
>
> The name space is "almost" unitary. People deploy things like domain suffix
> search lists so that users can type "mailserver" and arrive at
> "mailserver.corp.example.com" --
That use is basically dead. It might sort of work at an
> Il 08/08/2022 12:16 CEST Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear)
> ha scritto:
>
> I caution against those approaches that would set such a high bar that they
> would require researchers to fork out hundreds of thousands of dollars on
> application fees alone plus who knows how much e
Hi Joe, Dave, Christian, John, George, and others,
Thank you for taking the volume down a notch. It is much appreciated.
The ISE is looking for a way to have the work of the GNS published such
that I am comfortable that if it achieves wild success (RFC 5218), its
use is reasonably safe. I us
On Aug 8, 2022, at 08:08, Christian Huitema wrote:
> The name space is "almost" unitary. People deploy things like domain suffix
> search lists so that users can type "mailserver" and arrive at
> "mailserver.corp.example.com" -- or something else, depending where they
> started for.
There are
22 matches
Mail list logo
