> On 12 Oct 2020, at 08:44, Fred Baker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On Oct 8, 2020, at 7:08 AM, Daniel Migault via RSSAC <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Just to let you know that the draft for the private tld has been adopted as >> WG document. >> >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-dnsop-private-use-tld-00.txt__;!!PtGJab4!qHw-_WPRJG1YyMoR9K-baj4pViqk2fJQzJDsZbPg0smvVfNrGkUePaUGZNI96GahZI69WNY$ >> >> >> Yours, >> Daniel > > Thanks, Daniel. > > Joe and Roy, I'm trying to figure out how you intend these names to be > managed and used. In your draft, you opine that having some form of private > tld may be useful, and it may be.
Thank you for taking the time to read the document. > You apparently don't intend them to be announced in the root zone That is correct. > (or any other zone) We make no assumptions on other zones. > , and note that there is nothing that precludes them being formally defined > and published from the root in the future, invalidating all extant uses of > any such name without warning or review. This initial version of the draft details that it is highly unlikely that these two letter strings will ever be delegated, as it would violate principles that were set out in the past. You are quite right that nothing (in this draft) precludes them being formally defined. > > That seems a little precarious. One possible avenue that we’re researching is to treat these two letter strings as code points that at one point were set by the ISO as user-assigned, and should therefor be reserved (in the tradition of reserving previously assigned code points so that they can not be re-assigned to mean other things) and designate them as “special use” (RFC6761, RFC8244). > How do you plan to manage them? It seems to me that using the Special-Use Domain Names is a potential avenue to make sure that these are indeed never delegated from the root zone. Naturally this should all be done in coordination with the various ICANN communities and liaisons. I hope this addresses your question. We will detail our progress at the IETF109 DNSOP WG and hopefully publish version -01 of this document. Warm regards, Roy
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
