[NCSG-PC] Fwd: [] My assessment of .homenet as described during the WG session yesterday.

[Avri Doria]

FYI update on the status of special use names being delegated.

This could become a Council issue at some point, so, figured worth
passing on. I will continue tracking this.

avri



-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject:     [DNSOP] My assessment of .homenet as described during the
WG session yesterday.
Date:     Tue, 28 Mar 2017 17:32:31 +0000
From:     Terry Manderson <terry.manderson at icann.org>
To:     HOMENET <homenet at ietf.org>
CC:     dnsop at ietf.org <dnsop at ietf.org>



Dear HOMENET and DNSOP WG(s),

Wearing the INT AD hat.

Firstly, thank you to the DNSOP WG for the deep review, thoughts, and
considered responses to my request for review.

Secondly, my apologies for not sharing my throughs before the HOMENET
session. It would have been impractical to do so as this is a very
(VERY) fluid situation with IETF leadership also engaged in discussions.

This is simply an iteration of my description of the current situation
as delivered yesterday. Do be aware that conversations are continuing
and you should NOT take this as a declarative statement. During the
HOMENET WG session I specified that for this topic I am comfortable
answering _ clarifying _ questions. The same applies here. My answers
may or may not change due to the fluid nature of the concern and I hope
you appreciate that.

My summary of the situation is this.

1) .homenet _COULD_ be added to the special use domain registry based on
RFC6761

2) The expected future operation of HOMENET resolution for DNSSEC
validating stub resolvers requires a break in the DNSSEC chain of trust.

3) To achieve "2", the document _additionally_ asks IANA to insert an
insecure delegation into the root zone

4) The ask for "3" is not covered in IETF policy terms, in fact it tries
to put an entry into someone else's registry (the root zone), and will
require a set of collaborative discussions with the ICANN community and
a new process that handles this situation. There are no expectations
that this process will be defined in a reasonable time for the uses of
HOMENET.


Options, possibly not an exhaustive list

A) seek a .homenet special use domain with the request for an insecure
delegation in the root zone. (This is what the document asks for NOW,
and here we are)

B) seek a .homenet special use domain WITHOUT the delegation request AND
ask the IETF/IESG/IAB to commence the discussion with the ICANN
community to achieve an insecure delegation

c) seek a <SOMETHING>.arpa insecure special use delegation

d) go for "B" and if that doesn't work shift to "C"


Each of these have different positive and negatives in a raw technical
sense, UI design desires, and policy and political frames.

Again, this situation is fluid and as discussions evolve I will provide
more information when it is appropriate. In the mean-time I would very
much like everyone to take a calming breath and understand that I am
taking a very pragmatic view of this concern.

Cheers,
Terry
INT AD



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop