> On Jun 9, 2016, at 3:09 PM 6/9/16, Ray Bellis <r...@bellis.me.uk> wrote: > > > > On 09/06/2016 18:35, Markus Stenberg wrote: > >> Is that RFC6something process for getting gTLDs still blocked by >> ICANN or whoever who is simultaneously celebrating their 1000th $$$ >> gTLD? > > It's RFC 6761, and the process is suspended (AIUI) by the IESG. > > The history and politics of that are unclear, but to the best of my > knowledge ICANN had nothing to do with it. > > My recollection of events is that the suspension of the process was > related to the attempts to use it to register .gnu and a few others. > > There was insufficient clarity about what might have made those names > "special" and therefore eligible for reservation as RFC 6761 "special > use domain names" (with a distinct technical purpose) instead of being > just like any other TLD in the global DNS name space that would have to > be applied for through the ICANN process. > > That's also then tied up in the question of whether the trailing label > in something that otherwise looks like a domain name is suitable in the > general case for being a "protocol switch" signal (c.f. ".local") > > Personally I still think that ".home" would make a fine choice for HNCP > (except for the language bias issue) but if is to be the choice we need > to follow due process. Quite how we do that when that process is > suspended is the challenge currently facing your chairs and AD.
I think a good first step would be to decide exactly the desired behavior for domain names that end in ".home" rather than a DNS zone. I wasn't able to determine the expectations for ".home" from RFC 7788. - Ralph > > Ray > > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > homenet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
