Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Fwd: I-D Action:draft-pettersen-subtld-structure-04.txt

From: "Yngve N. Pettersen (Developer Opera Software ASA)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 22:41:02 +0100

On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 20:48:03 +0100, Dean Anderson <[email-masked]> wrote:

> On Tue, 11 Nov 2008, Yngve Nysaeter Pettersen wrote:
>> > You didn't read my message. the dot-UK registry only knows the domains
>> > it registered; dot-uk doesn't know if a group of several domains are  
>> in
>> > the same admin control. See the wachovia/bankofamerica example.   
>> Dot-uk
>>
>> I am not interested in cross-domain ownership. I do not care if  
>> opera.com
>> and operasoftware.com have the same owner and administrator.
>
> Isn't that the same problem?

Not for my current purposes, nor Mozilla or Microsoft's.

For all currently envisioned purposes of this system, it does not matter  
whether or not two distinct domains (that are directly below a  
registry-like domain/TLD), e.g. example1.com and example2.com, are owned  
by the same legal entity, they are separate domains for which we should  
not share information, nor group together in any other fashion.

There may be other uses for which such information is of interest, but for  
the present specification, that information is out of scope.

For the present purposes, the general rule that all names the example.tld  
domain, including example.tld itself is the responsibility of one entity,  
and "tld" is a TLD (even if it contains a dot), is sufficient. (That said,  
having an owner ID for each level of the hierarchy might help with some  
security features, but that is currently unnecessary for most purposes).

> In another message On Tue, 11 Nov 2008, Yngve Nysaeter Pettersen wrote:
>> AFAICT there are two basic ways to handle such a situation:
>
> There is a third way: do something within the cookies like I suggested
> so that 'subTLD' and crossTLD access can be controlled by the admin
> domains.

As I have said before: Cookies are not the only use for these data.

http://publicsuffix.org/learn/

	[T]he list of things for which Public Suffixes are used in Firefox 3 is:
	  - Restricting cookie-setting (as explained above)
	  - Restricting the setting of the document.domain property
	  - Sorting in the download manager
	  - Sorting in the cookie manager
	  - Searching in history
	  - "Responsible domain" display for some SSL certificates (not enabled  
by default)

<URL:  
http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2008/03/11/address-bar-improvements-in-internet-explorer-8-beta-1.aspx  

	Domain Highlighting

	At a glance, the most visible change with IE8 is Domain Highlighting.
	Internet Explorer 8 will automatically highlight what it considers to
	be the owning domain of whatever site you’re currently viewing. This
	helps users identify the real site they’re on when a website attempts to  
deceive them.

>> One is to let such domain owners register through their TLD to be
>> listed in their database as a registry-like domain (or in cases such
>> as PublicSuffix.org, submit a patch to them)
>
> And what honest, neutral entity will administer this information?

As I said: "register through their TLD", by informing the TLD registry who  
will then include the information in the domain structure specification  
they distribute via the as yet unspecified information gathering system  
(IANA is IMO a good candidate for such a repository).

>> The other require a form of policy document that can be posted at a
>> well-known location within the domain. It might use a variant of the
>> format my subtld draft defines, or something else (although I see no
>> real reason it should be significantly different). This would be
>> somewhat similar to the full P3P policy file. This might particularly
>> be useful for large organizations, like universities, or corporations,
>> to limit "cross-departemental" impact.
>
> Putting such information in DNS is prone to problems. DNS is not a

Where did I say something that could be interpreted as "put it in the DNS"  
about this second option?

I didn't, because the only thing of this as-yet-undefined system that  
might go into DNS is the name of the host the list will be stored at, e.g.  
domain-policy.example.tld, because this specification would be accessed  
over ordinary HTTP or HTTPS as an ordinary automatic document fetch.

However, this second system cannot be deployed *unless* there is an  
information system with the kind of data (or better) described in my  
subtld draft is in place. The reason is that the subtld system would tell  
the discovery mechanism where to look for the information, without that  
information the system would be vulnerable to being fed incorrect data  
because the client tried to download the spec for co.uk from  
domain-policy.co.uk .

-- 
Sincerely,
Yngve N. Pettersen
 
********************************************************************
Senior Developer                     Email: [email-masked]
Opera Software ASA                   http://www.opera.com/
Phone:  +47 24 16 42 60              Fax:    +47 24 16 40 01
********************************************************************
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

---

From: "Yngve N. Pettersen (Developer Opera Software ASA)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 22:41:02 +0100

<URL:  

	Domain Highlighting

-- 
Sincerely,
Yngve N. Pettersen