On 04-Oct-16 09:19, David Conrad wrote: > As far as I know, neither ICANN (the organization) nor anyone within > ICANN (the organization) is asking whether they should delegate such > names. Forward motion of those names is currently "indefinitely > deferred" pending _somebody_ (not ICANN staff) figuring out what to do > with them. I believe the hope had been that the IETF might provide > some technical guidance, but that didn't work. Now, some members of > the ICANN community are asking the board that those names be delegated > and that results in (re)opening the question of what to do with > "indefinitely deferred" strings.
Actually I thought they were asking that work that had been promised on further researching the problem and mitigation techniques be done as opposed to just prohibiting things because the first thoughts turned out to be inadequate. As for the so-called toxic waste names (i really find that terminology problematic) someone needs to find a solution otherwise the possibility of adding more and more names to the so called waste pile of usurped names over time becomes an increasing possibility. If someone can just start using a name and thus make it too hard to delegate we have a much bigger problem. avri avri --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
