[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Recap: 2821bis-01 Issue 1: Format of domain - trailing period

2007-04-17 10:52:01

John C Klensin wrote:

I also received a couple of long messages from a usual suspect
in these matters

<sigh />.  That's a one-man-process-experiment, or actually he's
a set of experiments not limited to 3683.  I bet he likes TLDs
operated as (SMTP or NNTP) hosts...

claiming to advise and/or represent several ccTLDs

...he's not necessarily talking about TLDs under the ICANN root.

Bottom line, based on responses received so far, is that no one
is using mail to TLD names.  Some think they would like to.

My impression, based on those remarks but, more important, on my
reading of the comments on the list, is that we shouldn't ban
mail to TLD domains, but should clarify and strengthen the "only
FQDNs on the wire" rule.

If you change your mind again:  I still like your 2821 "one-dot"
rule disqualifying TLDs, already mirrored in 4408 <domain-spec>
and in RFC.usefor-usefor-12 <path-nodot>.

Besides I don't like "host museum.", and I hated "host com." when
it was around.  Nobody needs TLDs as host (apart from localhost).

AFAIK ICANN tries to guarantee that TLD operators always get SLDs
noc.tld and whois.tld, isn't that good enough for all TLDs ?

TLD operators are also always free to create any SLD they like as
mail host (e.g. mail2.tld, "mail2" is a popular label for hosts
offering POP3, MSA, and webmail services).


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>