Hi George,
> RFC 6761 [RFC6761] specified mechanisms for reserving a top level
> name in the DNS.
>
> This reversed a prior decision documented by RFC 2860 [RFC2860] to
> close off mechanisms for name assignment in the IETF, the function
> being recognized as vesting with ICANN.
That is 100% incorrect. RFC 2860 clause 4.3 states explicitly and for
the exact purpose of *not* closing off assignments in all cases:
Note that (a) assignments of domain names for technical uses (such as
domain names for inverse DNS lookup), (b) assignments of specialised
address blocks (such as multicast or anycast blocks), and (c)
experimental assignments are not considered to be policy issues, and
shall remain subject to the provisions of this Section 4.
So whatever the technical merits of your proposal, such names and address
blocks remain under the IETF's authority. That doesn't mean the IETF
should blunder around with its eyes closed, but if we want .heffelump.
to be reserved for a technical purpose, we can so decide.
(I am not on the dnsop list so please keep me in cc.)
Regards
Brian
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
