%% You should probably cite draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem-06 instead of this revision.
@techreport{adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem-00,
    number =    {draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem-00},
    type =      {Internet-Draft},
    institution =   {Internet Engineering Task Force},
    publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force},
    note =      {Work in Progress},
    url =       {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem/00/},
    author =    {Joe Abley and Peter Koch and Alain Durand},
    title =     {{Problem Statement for the Reservation of Top-Level Domains in the Special-Use Domain Names Registry}},
    pagetotal = 12,
    year =      2015,
    month =     oct,
    day =       19,
    abstract =  {The dominant protocol for name resolution on the Internet is the Domain Name System (DNS). However, other protocols exist that are fundamentally different from the DNS, but which have syntactically- similar namespaces. When an end-user triggers resolution of a name on a system which supports multiple, different protocols for name resolution, it is desirable that the protocol to be used is unambiguous, and that requests intended for one protocol are not inadvertently addressed using another. {[}RFC6761{]} introduced a framework by which, under certain circumstances, a particular domain name could be acknowledged as being special. This framework has been used to make top-level domain reservations, that is, particular top-level domains that should not be used within the DNS to accommodate parallel use of non-DNS name resolution protocols by end-users and avoid the possibility of namespace collisions. Various challenges have become apparent with this application of the guidance provided in {[}RFC6761{]}. This document aims to document those challenges in the form of a problem statement, to facilitate further discussion of potential solutions.},
}