I think this is at least partially true. The other part is that
a fairly large number of entities are spending a very large
amount of money trying to obtain new gTLDs. Many of those
entities have ideas and consequent expectations about how usable
those TLD are going to be and for what. ...
The applicant guidebook for new gTLDs says quite clearly that the only
things you can put in your TLD zone file are SOA, NS, DS, in-bailiwick
glue, and associated DNSSEC records. If you want to put anything else
in your zone file, you need to ask ICANN's permission in advance.
(See pages 2-25 and 2-26 of the applicant guidebook.)
The reason this has come up now is that Google applied for .SEARCH as
a single registrant domain, and upon learning that there would be
major political headwinds, modified it to one where other search
providers could register and there would be something at
http://search/ or https://search/ that redirects you to your favorite
search provider, presumably remembered in a cookie.
You can read about it here, the (v2) link, section 23.10:
https://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/applicationchangehistory/1319
You don't have to tell me all the policy reasons that it might not be
a great idea to give Google a preview of everyone else's search
traffic, but there's nothing in the guidebook about that. The
guidebook does say no A or AAAA records for the TLD, so Google is
asking for an exception.
ICANN being ICANN, and clearly aware that Google has an unlimited
supply of lawyers, has been going around asking people are you *SURE*
that it's a bad idea to put A and AAAA records at the TLD? An
entirely reasonable response is, yes, nothing has changed, we're still
sure it's a bad idea.
But, of course, actual data would be nice, too.
R's,
John
_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp