> On 13 Aug 2022, at 00:35, John Levine <[email protected]> wrote: > > It appears that Warren Kumari <[email protected]> said: >> -=-=-=-=-=- >> >> Warren’s meta-comment -[ Please read this ]- >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> I believe that there is still an open-mineshaft problem around Internet >> domain namespaces - what exactly they are, what is the DNS namespace, how >> one determines the boundaries of the space, how one switches namespaces, >> etc. We've take a few cracks at this nut — a partial list includes the IAB >> ENAME workshop, SUDN problem statement, drafts from Suzanne and Ed, the >> pain around .onion (a fuller list is in [0]) -- but we haven't actually >> solved it. ... > > Having read your message and largely agreed with it, my suggestion is that > we declare defeat and give up. > > People come to us asking to reserve "good" names for them. As I said a > few messages ago, I think we could reserve random TLD strings like > .vhqnckwp without too much trouble, but nobody wants those. They want > memorable three or four letter strings. > > For better or worse, allocating memorable strings is ICANN's job. > While I have my doubts about the details of the process, they do have > a process, and it's allocated over 1200 TLDs. It is not cheap, but > ICANN says they set the price to cover costs and again, while again I > have some doubts about the details, it's clearly the right order of > magnitude since they have spent about 85% of what they collected. I > don't see any benefit from us short circuiting their evaluation > process. > > When we have tried to do something about memorable TLD strings, it has > not turned out well, viz. .corp, .home, and .mail. (We are lucky that > the Allium Growers Promotion Board doesn't want .onion.) Given the > history of failure, I think the sensible thing to do is to stop, which > means closing the Special-Use Domain Names registry.
Besides what John mentioned, even ICANN gave up the idea of a beauty pageant selection of who gets a string. ICANN tried that in the early 00s, and declared defeat on that model. Since 2012, the tie-breaker is who pays more money among those that promise to not break the Internet; what I've seen so far is an attempt to move back to the beauty pageant model, disguised by arguments of technical or philosophical superiority. That said, I believe what Warren is suggesting is more of a ten thousand foot view of the namespaces issue; and if that finds a way to allow innovation without fragmentation, it would be beneficial for DNS and non-DNS names alike. Rubens
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
