Re: [gentoo-user] TLD for home LAN?

[Grant Taylor]

On 1/15/22 3:33 AM, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> Hello list,

Hi.

> Rich F said recently, "I'd avoid using the .local TLD due to RFC 6762."

Ya....

I've read RFC 6762 in the past and I just skimmed part of it again.  I 
didn't find anything that prohibited the use of the local top level 
domain for things other than mDNS et al.

The only hard requirement that I did see is that if mDNS is used, that 
queries for <anything>.local /MUST/ be sent to mDNS.

N.B. that does not preclude /also/ sending queries for <anything>.local 
to other name resolution systems like traditional unicast DNS.

Ergo, RFC 6762 does not preclude the use of the local top level domain 
in traditional unicast DNS.

> That brings me back to a thorny problem: what should I call my local network?

Maybe it's just me, I'm weird like that, but I vehemently believe that 
*I* am the authority for the names of *MY* network(s).  As such, 
whatever name /I/ choose is the name that /my/ network(s) will use.

I don't care that a cable internet provider wants my router to be called 
<client-ID>.<city>.<state>.<customers>.<cable company>.<tld>.

What's more is that I don't fathom, much less allow, the cable company's 
  -- let's go with -- questionable naming have any influence on what my 
internal network is called.

> It used to be .prhnet, but then a program I tried a few years ago
> insisted on a two-component name, so I changed it to .prhnet.local.

There are /some/ complications that may have some influence on what 
names are chosen.

But I point out that your network quite likely did exactly what you 
wanted to do up until that point.

Q:  Did you continue to use the software that you tried?  Or did you end 
up renaming your network for something that you are no longer using?  }:-)

> Now I've read that RFC - well, Appendix G to it - and I'm scratching
> my head.

I note the distinct absence of the quintessential SHOULD or MUST that 
RFCs are notorious for in RFC 6762 Appendix G.  So ... I don't give the 
recommendation there in much credence.

What's more is that RFC 6762 Appendix G fails to take into account 
gateways that bridge mDNS into Unicast DNS.  E.g. they receive an mDNS 
query and gateway it to the configured uDNS.  Thereby (mostly 
seamlessly) tying the mDNS and uDNS name space together.

I really feel like RFC 6762 is a "you might want to consider not using 
the .local top level domain on the off hand chance that you ever have 
something that can't / won't work with it."

> I suppose it's possible that someone may want to connect an Apple
> device to my network, so perhaps I should clear the way for that
> eventuality.

Is that possibility significant enough to influence how /you/ run /your/ 
network?

/me puts his hand up to block glare looking out over the horizon looking 
for the SHOULD and MUST statements again, still not finding them.

I can tell you that I have first hand experience with using Apple 
devices on a network that used the local top level domain without problems.

> So, what TLD should I use? Should I use .home, or just go back to
> .prhnet? It isn't going to be visible to the Big Bad World, so does
> it even matter?

Use whatever TLD you want to use.  Be aware of any potential gotchas and 
decide if they are worth avoiding or not.

The old fable of "The Miller, his son, and the donkey" comes to mind. 
--  Make yourself happy.



-- 
Grant. . . .
unix || die