On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 01:02:54PM -0500, Joe Abley wrote:
If you're proposing that the IETF document a list of names that has
change control and authorship homed within ICANN, then I'm not sure
what the benefit of that is.
Setting aside the mind-bending metaphysical consequences of the
subject line in this thread, I actually think it would be a good idea
if there were, somewhere, a list of undelegated top-level names for
which change control and (policy) authorship nevertheless lie within
ICANN. At the moment, the canonical list of the reserved names from
ICANN's point of view is buried inside a document that many people
have no reason to consult, because they're not trying to get a new top
level delegation.
It therefore seems to me to be not a bad idea to have an RFC or IANA
registry for the "reserved names", in ICANN parlance. It would also
be good if some operational rules about what "reserved names" means
were in an RFC somewhere (for instance, are there different classes of
"reserved" names? Why? Do they come in and out of existence
depending on other states of the world? Can they be resolved on the
Internet? And so on. Depending on who was speaking, in my
experience, these distinctions were not always made.)
I'm actually indifferent to the publication means for this, though --
an RFC, an ICANN document that stands on its own, whatever -- but
since we have IANA registries already that seems to me to be the
obvious locus for yet another list.
A
--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs(_at_)shinkuro(_dot_)com
Shinkuro, Inc.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf