>+many to what Warren says. > >We do our best work when we do engineering, not rule-making. Let's >engineer a solution here that's more appealing than squatting. For my >money, alt-TLD looks about right.
I agree. On the other hand, since we are not the tsars of the Internet, it is fairly likely that no matter what we do, someone will start using .ramp (a stronger version of .onion) rather than .ramp.alt and it will become widely enough used that it makes technical sense to keep it out of the DNS, like .onion and .home. That would not be a disaster. I don't even see it as a problem, so long as we have a process to weigh the pros and cons and decide whether to add it to the list of domain names that are excluded from the DNS. (It may cause gnashing of teeth at ICANN as it screws up someone's business plan, which is definitely not our problem.) I suppose that if we update RFC 6761 it would be polite to send a note to ICANN reminding them that anyone who wants to add a new TLD to the DNS should consider as one of the risks that it collides with a name that is excluded for technical reasons, but I see no reason to go farther than that. R's, John _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
