[164455] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: On topic of domains
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Andrew Sullivan)
Fri Jul 12 07:21:18 2013
In-Reply-To: <CAAAwwbV_1KWnZ_BrhqFqmGaM1Z==rKz2b+xRMG3zipE1XFTuxg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 07:20:49 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <asullivan@dyn.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Jimmy Hess <mysidia@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Domain names can be presented with a trailing dot. A fully
> qualified domain always contains at least one explicit dot.
>
But not always at the end, which is why there's a problem. RFC1123, in my
opinion, contains a remark that ought to indicate to people that the
trailing dot convention isn't even universal for determining whether a name
is really fully-qualified. (See section 6.1.4.3. That RFC is also, of
course, how we got 3com.net as a legal name, for prior to 1123 "3com"
wasn't a valid label anywhere.)
Best,
A
