From zsako at banknet.net Fri Oct 10 13:40:31 1997 From: zsako at banknet.net (Janos Zsako) Date: Fri, 10 Oct 97 12:40:31 +0100 Subject: SLD starting with digit (or containing only digits) Message-ID: <9710101140.AA02310@banknet.banknet.net> Dear all, I would be grateful if someone could tell me what problems could arise by permitting domain names starting with a digit, or even containing *only* digits, under a TLD. I know this is not in accordance with RFC952. My question really is what technical problems could be expected if a TLD were to decide that it allows the above (and currently the required domain name length is only two characters). Thank you for any help on this. Janos Zsako From jh at ivm.net Fri Oct 10 14:15:35 1997 From: jh at ivm.net (Jens Hoffmann) Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 14:15:35 +0200 (MET DST) Subject: SLD starting with digit (or containing only digits) In-Reply-To: <9710101140.AA02310@banknet.banknet.net> from "Janos Zsako" at Oct 10, 97 12:40:31 pm Message-ID: <199710101215.OAA16272@vulcan.ko.ivm.net> Hi, "Janos Zsako wrote:" > I know this is not in accordance with RFC952. My question really is That's one of the reasons. > what technical problems could be expected if a TLD were to decide that > it allows the above (and currently the required domain name length is only > two characters). Hmm. I'D hate to teach sendmail to understand the difference between: jh@[194.64.7.1] and jh at 194.64.7.1.de That's a point which comes to mind, without delving deeply into the problem. Greetings, Jens -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | \ / |\ /| Internet | IVM GmbH | \ / | \ / | Vernetzung | Im Hufen Boden 16, D-53498 Waldorf | \ / | \/ | Mehrwertdienste | tel 0228-9864009 fax 0228-747 097 | \/ | | GmbH | info at ivm.net - http://www.ivm.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From chris at ripe.net Fri Oct 10 14:48:26 1997 From: chris at ripe.net (Chris Fletcher) Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 14:48:26 +0200 Subject: SLD starting with digit (or containing only digits) In-Reply-To: <9710101140.AA02310@banknet.banknet.net> References: <9710101140.AA02310@banknet.banknet.net> Message-ID: <133749242755432720076838513@office.ripe.net> Janos, > I would be grateful if someone could tell me what problems could arise > by permitting domain names starting with a digit, or even containing > *only* digits, under a TLD. FYI There are already lots of zones registered under .com with two digit names... 00.COM. 01.COM. 02.COM. 03.COM. 04.COM. 05.COM. 06.COM. 07.COM. 08.COM. 09.COM. [ etc...] So you wouldn't be the first to do it. Regards, Chris - RIPE NCC. From woeber at cc.univie.ac.at Fri Oct 10 15:08:30 1997 From: woeber at cc.univie.ac.at (Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet) Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 15:08:30 MET-DST Subject: SLD starting with digit (or containing only digits) Message-ID: <009BB916.D4FFA3EE.1@cc.univie.ac.at> Hi Janos! >I would be grateful if someone could tell me what problems could arise >by permitting domain names starting with a digit, or even containing >*only* digits, under a TLD. You might want to refer to RFC1912: Common DNS Operational and Configuration Errors and pages 2, 3 in particular. Wilfried. From pk at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE Fri Oct 10 16:35:48 1997 From: pk at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Peter Koch) Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 16:35:48 +0200 Subject: SLD starting with digit (or containing only digits) In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 10 Oct 1997 12:40:31 BST." <9710101140.AA02310@banknet.banknet.net> Message-ID: <199710101435.QAA07581@gunilla.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> > I would be grateful if someone could tell me what problems could arise > by permitting domain names starting with a digit, or even containing > *only* digits, under a TLD. > > I know this is not in accordance with RFC952. My question really is RFC952 was updated by RFC1123, so names starting with a digit are perfectly legal (technically). At all, we have to differentiate between host and domain names, with the latter being very little restrictions placed upon. However, most domain names wrt second level domains are intended to become (part of) hostnames. You will have to avoid host names that could be interpreted as IP addresses. > what technical problems could be expected if a TLD were to decide that > it allows the above (and currently the required domain name length is only > two characters). I do not understand this additional restriction. -Peter From zsako at banknet.net Fri Oct 10 16:47:45 1997 From: zsako at banknet.net (Janos Zsako) Date: Fri, 10 Oct 97 15:47:45 +0100 Subject: SLD starting with digit (or containing only digits) Message-ID: <9710101447.AA06223@banknet.banknet.net> > From woeber at cc.univie.ac.at Fri Oct 10 13:51:53 1997 Thanks to all who answered me. I am still confused, because the RFCs seem to be somewhat in contradiction with each other. The RFC1912 says: (Labels were initially restricted in [RFC 1035] to start with a letter, and some older hosts still reportedly have problems with the relaxation in [RFC 1123].) Note there are some Internet hostnames which violate this rule (411.org, 1776.com). On the other hand RFC1123 says: If a dotted-decimal number can be entered without such identifying delimiters, then a full syntactic check must be made, because a segment of a host domain name is now allowed to begin with a digit and could legally be entirely numeric (see Section 6.1.2.4). However, a valid host name can never have the dotted-decimal form #.#.#.#, since at least the highest-level component label will be alphabetic. This is in my view in contradiction with the last sentence quoted by me from RFC1912... [ More than that, RFC2181, which obsolates RFC1123, basically says that the DNS should be able to handle any binary string as a domain name (with the length limitations that apply). However, it emphasizes that the applications may impose restrictions on this... I am curious when will *.com be registered? :)) ] Janos From mnorris at hea.ie Fri Oct 10 17:20:11 1997 From: mnorris at hea.ie (Mike Norris) Date: Fri, 10 Oct 97 16:20:11 +0100 Subject: SLD starting with digit (or containing only digits) In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 10 Oct 97 15:47:45 BST." <9710101447.AA06223@banknet.banknet.net> Message-ID: <199710101520.QAA03457@dalkey.hea.ie> >I am curious when will *.com be registered? :)) ] They are already - as star.com and asterisk.com ;-) Mike