[161008] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: looking for terminology recommendations concerning non-rooted
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Andrews)
Fri Feb 22 00:58:12 2013
To: Brian Reichert <reichert@numachi.com>
From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 21 Feb 2013 17:55:40 CDT."
<20130221225540.GA99258@numachi.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 16:57:42 +1100
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
In message <20130221225540.GA99258@numachi.com>, Brian Reichert writes:
> I'm trying to nail down some terminology for doc purposes.
>
> The issue: most resources on the net freely describe a fully-qualified
> domian name ('FQDN') as to exclude the root domain; i.e, they exclude
> the trailing dot as mandated by some RFCs such as RFC 1535:
RFC 1535 is Informational. It has no status to mandate anything.
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1535.txt
>
> An absolute "rooted" FQDN is of the format {name}{.} A non
> "rooted" domain name is of the format {name}
>
> I'm trying to come up with some human-facing terminology that names
> these two forms:
>
> "a.b.c."
> "a.b.c"
>
> Many resources on the net use the term 'rooted domain name' for the
> former, but they're collectively ambigious about what the other
> form should be called.
>
> Does anyone here have any solid advice, or can point me to a resource
> that would call out useful conventions?
>
> This was all fueled by Microsoft's client code apparently stripping
> the root domain from PTR record results; I'm separately trying to
> track down why that's occuring...
RFC 952 as modified by RFC 1123 describe the legal syntax of a hostname.
There is no trailing period.
> --
> Brian Reichert <reichert@numachi.com>
> BSD admin/developer at large
>
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
