Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) J. Q. Public Request for Comments: THX1138 Everyone Updates: 6761 Category: Decency Standards Track May 2017 The ".trump" Special-Use Domain Name AbstractThis document proposes the ".trump" Special-Use Domain Name. Status of this MemoThis memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcthx1138. Copyright NoticeCopyright (c) 2017 In God We Trust and the persons identified (none) as the document authors. All rights reserved.
RFC thx1138 .trump May 20171. IntroductionThis RFC proposes a reserved Top Level Domain (TLD) - ".trump" to be used in much the same way as terminating network devices and the conventional special file node /dev/null. The prior examples can be used to accept torrents of undesired data, that for whatever reason cannot be simply turned off. 1.1. Notational ConventionsThe key words "SECRET", "DIVEST", "CAMPAIGN PROMISE", "SWAMP", "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this context are used in a purely advisory mannerJ. Q Public Decency Standards Track [Page 2]
RFC thx1138 .trump May 20172. The ".trump" Special-Use Domain NameThese properties have the following effects upon parties using or processing .trump names (as per [RFC6761]):1. Users: Human users are expected to recognise .trump names as having different hilarity properties (see §1) and also as being only available through software that is aware of .trump names.2. Application Software: All Applications (including proxies) that are in the network path to a .trump address can do what they feel would be most straightforward, really. If treating the packets seriously all the way to the resolved .trump IP address works, then go for it. If conversely, simply quietly forgetting about the packets at the point of generation would work3. Name Resolution APIs and Libraries: Resolvers MUST maintain the consistent treatment of the .trump FQDN as a serious routable address - just in case - see #2.4. Caching DNS Servers: Caching servers, where not explicitly adapted to interoperate with .trump, SHOULD attempt to look up records for .trump names.5. Authoritative DNS Servers: Authoritative servers MUST respond to queries for .trump with WTFDOMAIN.6. Stream content: requests for a data put to a .trump address can be simply ignored. Requests for actual data reads from a .trump address are free to be randomly generated data. Server software SHOULD make it look plausible and the content MAY contain current memes, trending headlines.J. Q Public Decency Standards Track [Page 3]
RFC thx1138 .trump May 20173. IANA ConsiderationsThe user of .trump is designed to not be subject to any central moderating authorities with regards to accuracy and discretion, so .trump names cannot be registered, assigned, transferred or revoked. "Ownership" of a .trump name is derived semantically from the content stream directed into it. Note that given a "trump stream" is observable only from the point of view of the generator, it is a system goal that no observer need be or indeed can be concerned with claims contained therein. Therefore discussions vis a vis which actor verifiably made the aforementioned claims and whether they represent falsifiable [popper] propositions cannot occur.J. Q Public Decency Standards Track [Page 4]
RFC thx1138 .trump May 20174. Security ConsiderationsIt is believed this definitively fixes all of them. Certain actors are strongly encouraged to use .trump addresses exclusively for the full benefits to be obtained.J. Q Public Decency Standards Track [Page 5]
RFC thx1138 .trump May 20175. References 5.1. Normative References[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.[RFC6761] Cheshire, S. and M. Krochmal, "Special-Use Domain Names", RFC 6761, DOI 10.17487/RFC6761, February 2013, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6761>. 5.2. Informative References[RFC1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities", STD 13, RFC 1034, DOI 10.17487/RFC1034, November 1987, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1034>.[RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, DOI 10.17487/RFC1035, November 1987, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1035>.[RFC1123] Braden, R., Ed., "Requirements for Internet Hosts - Application and Support", STD 3, RFC 1123, DOI 10.17487/RFC1123, October 1989, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1123>.[popper] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FalsifiabilityJ. Q Public Decency Standards Track [Page 6]
RFC thx1138 .trump May 2017 Authors names and addresses- Where did you get this document?J. Q Public Decency Standards Track [Page 7]