[dns-operations] When TLDs have apex A records

[bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com]

On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 07:27:57PM -0700, k claffy wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 04:37:12PM +0000, bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
>   On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 09:01:12AM -0700, David Conrad wrote:
>   > 
>   > In any event, ICANN's board reacts to input.  I believe the board has  
>   > gotten advice that there was pretty much unanimity within the  
>   > technical community that wildcards at the top-level were a bad idea  
>   > and should not be allowed.  They acted to implement that advice.  If  
>   > there is contrary advice that should be provided to modify the board's  
>   > action, that would be good to know.
>   
>   	I've given my inputs to four board members - two of which
>   	have some empathy for the plight of those now caught inthe
>   	rather draconion edict of wildcard prohibition.  
> 
> 
> bill, 
> 
> can i read some write-up somewhere of the plight(s)?
> what is it that wildcards let these folk do that
> they cannot accomplish any other way, at less cost
> to the integrity of the protocol?  

	probably not. my inputs wer verbal. but wildcards, by definition
	are not detrimental to the integrity of the protocol. wildcards
	have been around since the DNS was invented.  no worse than say 
	MX or HINFO records.

	sort of doesn't matter, that ship has sailed, the board has spoken
	and i suspect there is little you or I could do to change the direction
	of that huge inertial movement.  icann is hardly agile or responsive.

> admit to being influenced by > 100 pages of peer-reviewed
> technical text conclusive against tld wildcards as the 
> best solution to anything.  

	kind of depends on what heinous tricks folks do
	with the rdata on a wildcard entry.  much of the 100+
	pages of peer-reviewed text focus on what happens w/ the
	rdata side of the reply (if any).

	
> k