On 2012-09-21 1:24 PM, Carlos M. martinez wrote: > I'm on Randy on this... if we restrict the things protocols can / should > do to the lowest level of what applications support, we'll be empty > handed pretty quickly.
i have two observations. first, this discussion isn't fruitful and won't be. the place to send your comments is: http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/sac053-dotless-domains-24aug12-en.htm second, icann isn't able to set tech policy. what they are able to do is operate the root zone in a way that keeps the internet stable, secure, scalable, and safe. to that end, prohibiting anything other than NS and SOA in the apex of a gTLD will keep a lot of local applications from believing that external resources are actually internal, thus granting them powers (if they are web sites) that other external resources would not have. there's also the "one world, one internet" thing. names without dots have always been treated as non-universal, other than the string "localhost". that is, if i am on yahoo's corporate network and i visit http://hr/ i will get yahoo's human resources departmental web page; if i am on google's corporate network and i visit http://hr/ then i will get google's human resources departmental web page, and so on down highway 101. icann deals in universal names. they are within their responsibilities if they tell gTLD awardees that all names created by this contract must be universal, and thus, no A RR's or AAAA RR's at the apex. paul _______________________________________________ dns-operations mailing list [email protected] https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations dns-jobs mailing list https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-jobs
