Domain Names, A Case for Clarifying
draft-lewis-domain-names-09

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2017-08-09 (latest revision 2017-08-01)
Stream ISE
Intended RFC status Informational
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream ISE state In ISE Review
Revised I-D Needed
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Document shepherd No shepherd assigned
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Network Working Group                                           E. Lewis
Internet-Draft                                                     ICANN
Intended status: Informational                            August 1, 2017
Expires: February 2, 2018

                  Domain Names, A Case for Clarifying
                    draft-lewis-domain-names-09.txt

Abstract

   This document researches the origin of the term Domain Name in the
   Request for Comments document series, documenting that the term did
   not originate in the documents defining the Domain Name System.  The
   document describes how the term came to be used, how the DNS
   followed, and surveys the diverse ways Domain Names have been
   interpreted within various protocols over time.  The purpose of this
   is to give a solid foundation for work on Domain Names across all
   protocols making use of Domain Names.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on February 2, 2018.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must

Lewis                   Expires February 2, 2018                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft     Domain Names, A Case for Clarifying       August 2017

   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  Goal  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.2.  Background  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Emergence of Domain Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.1.  The Term "Domain Name" Itself . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     2.2.  The Term "Resolve"  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   3.  Dialects, So To Speak, of Domain Names  . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     3.1.  Domain Names as Restricted for DNS  . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     3.2.  Host Names  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     3.3.  URI Authority and Domain Names  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     3.4.  Internet Protocol Address Literals  . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     3.5.  Internationalized Domain Names in Applications  . . . . .  10
     3.6.  Restricted for DNS Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     3.7.  Tor Network Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     3.8.  X.509 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     3.9.  Multicast DNS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     3.10. /etc/hosts  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     3.11. Other Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     3.12. Other Others  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   4.  Interoperability Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   5.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   8.  Informational References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19

1.  Introduction

   Why bother to define Domain Names now, three decades after the
   earliest mentions in RFC documents?  There are many examples of names
   as identifiers in existence, a lot of running code.  There is a large
   industry built on management of names as well, a lot of financial
   investment made.  Would not a definition appearing now be merely an
   academic exercise or worse, a disruption to what seems to be a
   reliable system?

   A desire to examine this topic is a reaction to the discussion
Show full document text