[as112-ops] [gii-ops] Advice requested on a proposal to delegate .local to AS112

[William Sotomayor]

>On 21/04/16 20:50, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>> In the Internet-Draft "Using DNAME in the root for the delegation of
>> special-use TLDs"
>> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bortzmeyer-dname-root>, there is a
>> proposal to delegate heavy-use non-existing TLD like .local to the new
>> AS 112. Obviously, the advice of operators of the new AS 112 is very
>> important. So, please, if you approve or disapprove this idea, speak
>> now.
>
>My questions are:
>
>*) How well deployed is RFC7535 (and the corresponding implementation
>guidance in RFC7534)?

I've not yet done a table survey to see how well RFC7534, but it's close 
to time to get doing it.  But last I saw, it wasn't well deployed.

>*) How do we measure its deployment? Atlas probes, open resolver scans, 
>etc.

Currently in progres is an open resolver scan, so results are just about 2 
weeks away.

>*) What is the criteria to declare the new AS112 worthy of having real
>things delegated to it? I'm not aware of any existing delegations.
>Please correct me if I'm wrong.
>
>(And as an AS112 w/RFC7535 operator, we don't get delegated DNS traffic
>to the new prefixes, last time I looked (a few months ago))

Therein lies the rub.  I'm not sure there's a 1:1 uptake between RFC7534 
and the RFC it replaced.

As for DNAME, I don't see much in that regard either.

wfms