Subject: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-05.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 08:59:32 -0700

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations of the IETF.

        Title           : DNS Terminology
        Authors         : Paul Hoffman
                          Andrew Sullivan
                          Kazunori Fujiwara
	Filename        : draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-05.txt
	Pages           : 35
	Date            : 2017-03-13

Abstract:
   The DNS is defined in literally dozens of different RFCs.  The
   terminology used by implementers and developers of DNS protocols, and
   by operators of DNS systems, has sometimes changed in the decades
   since the DNS was first defined.  This document gives current
   definitions for many of the terms used in the DNS in a single
   document.

   This document will be the successor to RFC 7719.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis/

There's also a htmlized version available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-05

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-05

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

---

From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:33:52 -0500

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 08:59:32AM -0700,
 [email-masked] <[email-masked]> wrote 

> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-05.txt

The new definition of QNAME describes as equivalent two conflicting
definitions, the original one, in RFC 1034, and the one of RFC 2308,
which seems used only by this RFC. IMHO, we should keep only the RFC
1034 definition.

I filed an errata against RFC 2308
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=4983>

---

From: Andrew McConachie <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:41:20 -0500

> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dnsop-terminology-bis-05
If a domain name is made up of labels, and labels are made up of octets, 
then can there be non-digital representations of domain names? For 
example, if I spray paint 'www.example' on the side of a bus, is it not 
a domain name because it is made up of paint instead of octets?

I don't see anything in this document restricting the terms to 'on the 
wire' definitions. So I assume that the scope of 'domain name' includes 
non-digital instantiations. Perhaps what's needed isn't so much a new 
definition for label, but clarification on the scope of these terms and 
their definitions.

Thanks,
Andrew