idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-dnsind-test-tlds-02.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Cannot find the required boilerplate sections (Copyright, IPR, etc.) in this document. Expected boilerplate is as follows today (2024-04-25) according to https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info : IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.a: This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.b(i), paragraph 2: Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.b(i), paragraph 3: This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Missing expiration date. The document expiration date should appear on the first and last page. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about Internet-Drafts being working documents. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about 6 months document validity -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about the list of current Internet-Drafts. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about the list of Shadow Directories. ** Bad filename characters: the document name given in the document, 'draft-ietf-dnsind-test-tlds-02.txt,', contains other characters than digits, lowercase letters and dash. ** Missing revision: the document name given in the document, 'draft-ietf-dnsind-test-tlds-02.txt,', does not give the document revision number ~~ Missing draftname component: the document name given in the document, 'draft-ietf-dnsind-test-tlds-02.txt,', does not seem to contain all the document name components required ('draft' prefix, document source, document name, and revision) -- see https://www.ietf.org/id-info/guidelines#naming for more information. == Mismatching filename: the document gives the document name as 'draft-ietf-dnsind-test-tlds-02.txt,', but the file name used is 'draft-ietf-dnsind-test-tlds-02' == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack an IANA Considerations section. (See Section 2.2 of https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist for how to handle the case when there are no actions for IANA.) ** The document seems to lack separate sections for Informative/Normative References. All references will be assumed normative when checking for downward references. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == Couldn't figure out when the document was first submitted -- there may comments or warnings related to the use of a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work that could not be issued because of this. Please check the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info to determine if you need the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. -- The document date (March 1998) is 9538 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) No issues found here. Summary: 10 errors (**), 1 flaw (~~), 3 warnings (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 INTERNET-DRAFT Test and Example TLDs 2 September 1997 3 Expires March 1998 5 Test and Example Top Level Domain Names 6 ---- --- ------- --- ----- ------ ----- 8 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd 9 Aliza R. Panitz 11 Status of This Document 13 This draft, file name draft-ietf-dnsind-test-tlds-02.txt, is 14 intended to be become a Best Current Practice RFC. Distribution of 15 this document is unlimited. Comments should be sent to the DNS 16 mailing list or to the authors. 18 This document is an Internet-Draft. Internet-Drafts are working 19 documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, 20 and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute 21 working documents as Internet-Drafts. 23 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six 24 months. Internet-Drafts may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by 25 other documents at any time. It is not appropriate to use Internet- 26 Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as a 27 ``working draft'' or ``work in progress.'' 29 To learn the current status of any Internet-Draft, please check the 30 1id-abstracts.txt listing contained in the Internet-Drafts Shadow 31 Directories on ds.internic.net (East USA), ftp.isi.edu (West USA), 32 nic.nordu.net (North Europe), ftp.nis.garr.it (South Europe), 33 munnari.oz.au (Pacific Rim), or ftp.is.co.za (Africa). 35 Abstract 37 To reduce the likelihood of conflict and confusion, several top level 38 domain names are reserved for use in private testing and as examples 39 in documentation. 41 Table of Contents 43 Status of This Document....................................1 44 Abstract...................................................1 46 Table of Contents..........................................2 48 1. Introduction............................................3 49 2. TLDs for Testing and Documentation Examples.............3 50 3. Security Considerations.................................4 52 References.................................................5 53 Author's Addresses.........................................5 54 Expiration and File Name...................................5 56 1. Introduction 58 The global Internet Domain Name System is documented in RFC 1034, 59 1035, 1591 and numerous additional Requests for Comment. It defines 60 a tree of names starting with root, ".", immediately below which are 61 top level domain names such as .com and .us. Below top level domain 62 names there are normally additional levels of names. 64 2. TLDs for Testing and Documentation Examples 66 There is a need for top level domain names that can safely be used in 67 private testing, as examples in documentation, and for 68 experimentation, without fear of conflicts with actual top level 69 domain names in the global DNS. The creation and assignment of new 70 top level domain names is becoming an increasingly prominent decision 71 as the domain name system assumes increasing importance in the world. 72 For this reason, it is best to allocate a reasonably large number of 73 names of different lengths now to reduce the probability of further 74 top level domain name creation an assignment for this purpose in the 75 forseeable future. 77 To satisfy these needs, the following nine domain names are 78 permanently reserved. An additional reason for reserving .link and 79 .site is to avoid confusion with the link.local and site.local domain 80 names [draft-ietf-dnsind-local-names-00.txt]. 82 .xy 83 .xz 84 .nil 85 .tld 86 .link 87 .site 88 .test 89 .example 90 .asixtythreecharacterstopleveldomainnamewhichisthelongestallowed 92 Note: two letter top level domain names are reserved for ISO 3166 / 93 Universal Postal Union two letter country codes. However, ISO 3166 94 reserves all two letter codes beginning with "x" for local use and 95 states that they will never be assigned to a country. 97 The above nine names will be added to the root with a single type TXT 98 RR under each. The RDATA for these TXT RRs will contain the single 99 string 101 Reserved, see RFC NNNN. 103 [where NNNN is the number of the RFC this draft gets issued as.] 105 3. Security Considerations 107 Confusion and conflict can be caused by the use of a current or 108 potential future top level domain name in testing, experimentation, 109 or as an example in documentation. Test and experimental software 110 can escape and end up being run against the global operational DNS. 111 Even examples used "only" in documentation can end up being coded and 112 released or cause conflicts due to later real use and the possible 113 acquisition of intellectual property rights in such "example" names. 115 The reservation of several top level domain names specifically for 116 these purposes will minimize such confusion and conflict. 118 References 120 RFC 1034 - P. Mockapetris, "Domain names - concepts and facilities", 121 11/01/1987. 123 RFC 1035 - P. Mockapetris, "Domain names - implementation and 124 specification", 11/01/1987. 126 RFC 1591 - J. Postel, "Domain Name System Structure and Delegation", 127 03/03/1994. 129 draft-ietf-dnsinc-local-names-01.txt 131 Author's Addresses 133 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd 134 CyberCash, Inc. 135 318 Acton Street 136 Carlisle, MA 01741 USA 138 Telephone: +1 508 287 4877 139 +1 703 620-4200 (main office, Reston, VA) 140 FAX: +1 508 371 7148 141 EMail: dee@cybercash.com 143 Aliza R. Panitz 144 AccessAbility Internet Services, Inc. 145 12515 Greenbriar Road 146 Potomac, MD 20854 USA 148 Telephone: +1 301 983-3547 149 FAX: +1 301 983-4899 150 EMail: buglady@ability.net 152 Expiration and File Name 154 This draft expires March 1998. 156 Its file name is draft-ietf-dnsind-test-tlds-02.txt.