Actually, maybe there should be a general document "DNS Squatting
Considered Harmful"? I personally don't see any real difference
between squatting on "onion" vs squatting on "zz" except that we ended
up with a ex post facto approval of .onion. And that AIRC was a near
thing.
So maybe:
1) The IETF and/or ICANN will not allocate any of the 2 letter country
codes as TLDs unless and until that code is allocated to a country by ISO.
2) Any one squatting on unassigned codes should not expect remediation
from either the IETF or ICANN if that code is later allocated to a country.
3) As a general matter TLDs of any form unassigned by ICANN should not
be used for private use. Please pursue a special assignment via the
IETF asking for concurrence from ICANN. Other language about how the
assignment might not occur, might occur, but not for the purpose
requested, etc.
Mike
On 8/1/2021 5:50 PM, Roy Arends wrote:
On 30 Jul 2021, at 23:34, Wes Hardaker <[email protected]> wrote:
Roy Arends <[email protected]> writes:
Essentially, instead of making the pond safe, we’ll have a warning
sign that using the pond is at their own risk.
The wording of said warning sign is the critical element, IMHO.
Certainly my support of the document greatly depends on said wording.
Sure.
In the end, there should be a goal behind why we want to publish
something. If that goal is "know people do this. don't do this.
please stop", then that may be a reasonable goal. If we're just going
to document history, without recommendations (to stop), then I think it
may bring more harm than good.
IMHO, we should document that people do this, and that there are risks when
people do this, and document what these risks are.
Warmly
Roy
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
