Re: example.com

[Doug Barton <DougB@dougbarton.net>]

Randy Bush wrote:
>>>the iesg wonders whether it should be seriously pushing back on
>>>domain names used as examples in drafts that are not drawn from
>>>rfc 2606. 
>>
>>Yes, they should. I think the reasoning is obvious ...
> 
> 
> i suspect it is not obvious to all.  so you might help explain a
> bit.

Well, the first two paragraphs of section two lay out the reasoning I'm 
referring to. There is no reason to use other names in the documentation 
when there are perfectly suitable examples designed specifically to be 
used in documentation available.

In addition to the general issue of not using domain names that could 
someday be allocated for a real purpose, actually "following our own 
rules" increases the perception of professionalism of the work product 
on the part of those who come after. To people with a high level of 
technical sophistication, these are trivial matters. However, we can't 
know the audience down the road, so the more internally consistent the 
products of the IETF process are, the lower the barrier of understanding 
to the real point of a given document.

Doug

#----------------------------------------------------------------------
# To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>.