Hi, On 18 Jul 2016, at 17:14, Wouter Cloetens <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Am I to interpret that response as a "no" to the question whether anyone has spoken to ICANN? Which would mean that the rejection of .home is based on an assumption? There was an ICANN person present in a meeting as far back as IETF88 willing to talk about this specific case. Tim bfn, Wouter On 18/07/16 18:03, Ted Lemon wrote: It could be seen as collusion. Remember, lawyers are much more creative in finding vulns than all but the most paranoid of security geeks. :) On Jul 18, 2016 17:49, "Wouter Cloetens" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: On 18/07/16 17:01, Ted Lemon wrote: 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. I'm a bit confused about this. Although Dothome Ltd. paid an application fee, they failed the initial evaluation. ICANN ultimately concluded in 2013 that .home was high risk, or "dead" in the terminology used in an article to which ICANN links. I can't reach this at the moment: https://icannwiki.com/.home So here's the Google cache: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:OdSc1uEzj_cJ:https://icannwiki.com/.home+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=de So, why would ICANN's gTLD people not be open to declaring .home to be off their list, and open for redefinition by IETF? 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 " o IETF and ICANN independently have remit to assign names out of the namespace that Internet Names represent; a formal coordination process does not exist." Can't that be fixed? Has anyone tried to speak to / negotiate with ICANN? 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 <<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]<mailto:[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 _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet -- Chief Home Gateway Architect SoftAtHome http://www.softathome.com/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/wcloetens Vaartdijk 3/B701, B-3018 Wijgmaal Tel: +32-16-852010 Mobile: +32-492-277790 Conf. phone: +32-16-852097 This message and any attachments are confidential, intended solely for the addressees and are SoftAtHome’s ownership. Any unauthorized use or dissemination is prohibited. If you are not the intended addressee of this message, please cancel it immediately and inform the sender. _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
