Andy -
| This could be done in the case of Country/region code TLDs under the
| control of the individual registries. It couldn't be done fairly the case
| of the 'international' TLDs such as .COM .NET and .ORG or any new
| non-country/region specific names because no two countries would agree on
| the interpretation of the guidelines.
Yes, the DNS is the wrong tool in which to do ".kids"-like things
because multihoming in the DNS is an administrative headache.
| The same is true of picking address pairs for 'kid safe' connections. The
| criteria for acceptable systems can only be based on the national laws and
| network addresses allocated to each country concerned.
Ah, but you see, the IPv6 way of multihoming is significantly different;
when a site multihomes its border router acquires automatically the TLA/NLA
information of the new provider, and subsequently instructs autoconfiguring
hosts to use addresses in this new space.
So, the site in which we locate "www.disney.com" merely needs
a logical connection to each of the "kid-safe" spaces it is allowed
to live within. (It can also announce subnets of each such kid-safe space).
| This means that the
| administrator of a system in China may decide that the Australian
| definition of 'Children safe' was OK but would block the networks in France
| and the UK.
But since a DNS search on "www.disney.com" likely would result
in a "Children Safe in China" address, this should be no problem at all!
See, IPv6 is intellgently designed so that multihoming adds addresses
to the hosts, so that host-pairs can do policy-based routing themselves.
Sean.