Subject: [dnssd] ARCING BoF and mailing list

From: Douglas Otis <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 18:26:40 -0800

Dear Ted,

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cheshire-homenet-dot-home-02

https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/name-collision-mitigation-study-06jun14-en.pdf
,--
Lacking clear RFC 1918-like guidance directing operators to
DNS namespaces safe for internal use, several such
namespaces have been “appropriated” for this purpose over
the years. While the etiology is subtly different, the .corp
and .home TLDs are clear outliers in this respect; the use
of .corp and .home for internal namespaces/networks is so
overwhelming that the inertia created by such a large
“installed base” and prevalent use is not likely reversible.
We also note that RFC 6762 suggests that .corp and .home are
safe for use on internal networks.
'--

Reservation of Special-Use Domain Names will not circumvent
normal domain name registration processes. Reservation as
a Special-Use Name can however ensure it is NOT part of
the DNS global namespace and returns NXDOMAIN. In the case
of .corp or .home, a responsible agency is irrelevant due to
conventions established by those meeting obvious necessities.

Registering a domain should not be considered a necessary
expense for resolving hosts contained in homenet realms. A
home network may consist of multiple links interconnected
using IP-layer routing rather than link-layer bridging
where multicast might be impractical or poorly supported.

Homenet routers should not forward link-local IPv6 packets
to exclude traffic forwarded from the global Internet and
may not forward some multicast traffic (especially that of
non-diffused mDNS). A Special-Use Domain Name can anchor
DNS-SD resources without being mistaken for an
organizational domain. Otherwise devices made by many
vendors are likely to make use of non-registered names
nevertheless. Adopting a Special-Use Domain Name better
ensures against future name collisions and resulting
confusion that might otherwise occur.

The URI domain is normally assessed from a security
standpoint and used to illicit user feedback of potential
threats where changing the URI form would be counter
productive since this would require needless widespread change.

Special-Use Domain Names of Peer-to-Peer Name Systems

GNU Name System (GNS), for example, defines a decentralized
and censorship-resistant overlay able to operate within mesh
network topology as a bootstrap replacement. Special
zone relative names based on a distributed hash offer
DNS-free access for Friend-to-Friend networks. Relative
names end in '.+' which indicates names resolved relative to
the current local authoritative zone. Replacing the '.+'
with the delegation chain to the authoritative zone produces
a valid GNS name. Swapping .home for .gnu reduces the
burden seen at root servers, and offers interesting
techniques for handling local name space that can be
differentiated by GNS specific Resource Records. Perhaps an
I-D should be written to further extend the potential use of
a DNS overlay and how to make its use locally safe.

Perhaps use of GNS Resource records as an extension could
eliminate a need for the resources and administration
otherwise necessary to support Internet accessed DNS just to
establish local names not published below the .local TLD.
Currently there is no site-local scope naming conventions
available and this should be changed without impacting URI
conventions where examination of the entire name is most
often used to assess any need for caution.

Regards,
Douglas Otis