[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [DNSOP] Minor editorial change to draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps

2017-07-04 12:33:40
I find Randys line of discussion mirroring my own thoughts.
And to answer your question above, technically, the TLD  org.  is a member
of the IN class, so in the OF class, it is credible to posit the existence
of  a org. TLD.   TLDs are per class... :)


On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 7:01 AM, Ted Lemon <mellon(_at_)fugue(_dot_)com> wrote:

On Jul 4, 2017, at 9:53 AM, Randy Bush <randy(_at_)psg(_dot_)com> wrote:
i would offer to put my keyboard where my mouth is.  but i fear that, at
the bottom, i would have the unreasonable desire for dns classes to
support these kinds of things.  i.e. i don't think we have a clean fix.
but it would be nice to document the good with the bad.

That sounds like a solution, not a motivation. That is, you care about the
problem hypothetically, and have a hypothetical solution. In practice when
we’ve talked about using dns classes to solve problems that have motivated
rfc6761 allocations, it hasn’t really helped, because the infrastructure
required to use them this way is not present, and this isn’t how they were
originally intended to be used.

For example, is with a different class not a subdomain of the
.org TLD? Would ICANN not object to us designating it for use by someone
else?  I suspect yes, and I wouldn’t blame them.
DNSOP mailing list