On 26 Feb 2014, at 5:03, Mark Andrews <[email protected]> wrote: > In message <[email protected]>, David > Conrad > writes: > >> On Feb 25, 2014, at 9:51 AM, Stuart Cheshire <[email protected]> wrote: >>> If we have *some* pseudo-TLDs reserved for local-use names, >> >> I would think = >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-1_alpha-2#User-assigned_code_element= >> s would be appropriate for this purpose. >> >> Regards, >> -drc > > Whatever is used needs to be insecurely delegated so that in app > validation will work.
I still don’t see why we need a TLD, or a delegation/reservation under ARPA. There are many, many TLDs under which an application/protocol implementer can reserve some namespace for their exclusive use at low cost ($10/year, say). Why is this approach not preferred for a new application/protocol? It seems far simpler. Perhaps all that is missing is some guidance that says “you shouldn’t hijack namespaces that you don’t control, even for non-DNS applications; register a domain instead”. Joe _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
