[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Minor philosophical update to draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps

2017-07-05 12:25:35
On Jul 4, 2017, at 1:09 PM, John Levine <johnl(_at_)taugh(_dot_)com> wrote:
Special use TLDs are the North Korea of the IETF.  Everyone agrees
they're a problem, but there's no agreement about what to do, with
attitudes ranging from resigned acceptance to aggressive

The countermeasures all have problems.  Some make implausible
assumptions like knowing in advance where all the missile launchers,
er, stunt resolvers are.  Others would take strong action that would
produce a toxic rain of collateral damage on their allies.

Actually, one of the reasons we did a problem statement document and not a "why 
are these useful" document as Randy has suggested is that there is no consensus 
even that special-use names are a problem.   A lot of people think that it's 
gTLDs that are the problem, not special-use names: gTLDs, by allocating names 
that ought to have been special-use names, have created a serious problem in 
that we can no longer use special-use names freely, and that not all uses of 
special-use names remain possible.

I don't mean to open a discussion into that topic here—I realize that there is 
no consensus on it, and that this position is not shared by various people, 
yourself included.   I just want to point out that you've expressed it as 
universally true that people think special-use names are bad, and that is not 
in fact the case: if it were, we wouldn't need to publish this document.