A Procedure for Cautious Delegation of a DNS Name
draft-kolkman-cautious-delegation-02
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Olaf Kolkman , Andrew Sullivan , Warren Kumari | ||
| Last updated | 2014-02-02 (Latest revision 2013-08-01) | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
NOTE: The authors recognize that the statistical models that would inform the process are not well understood and that the possibilities to game the system might be unmountable. Unless we reach more insights on how to deal with this details this work is abandoned. Sometimes, a DNS name is known to be in use in the wild even though it was never properly delegated. This situation appears particularly, but not only, true in certain domains near the root of the tree: people have independently used those non-existent top-level domains as private namespaces. If those names are to be delegated in the public DNS, prudence dictates that collisions between the private uses and the public use be minimized. We outline a procedure to evaluate the harm of delegation.
Authors
Olaf Kolkman
Andrew Sullivan
Warren Kumari
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)