Yup. In terms of minimizing risk to the IETF, switching to .homenet is expedient--that's why I put it in the Homenet Naming/Service Discovery Architecture doc. Perhaps some homenet participants aren't aware of the issues surrounding this. The reason we are getting so much top-down push from IETF leadership on this is not that IETF leadership are being political--it's that there's a real cost to the IETF if one of the GTLD people decides that we have taken a name for which they paid an application fee. I apologize for glossing over this in my earlier response.
If people are interested in better understanding this problem, I encourage you to read this: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tldr-sutld-ps-02#section-3 You can get more background by reading section 4 as well. Bear in mind, s/.local/.home/ in section 4.2.4. On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Andrew Sullivan <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 03:33:28PM +0200, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > > > > .HOME has not been handed out by ICANN yet > > There are several applications for home in the root zone. To my mind, > that means that home has been claimed as being inside the global DNS > context, and therefore is not available under RFC 6761. > > Best regards, > > A > > -- > Andrew Sullivan > [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet >
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
