In message <[email protected]>, james woodyatt writes: > > On Dec 12, 2016, at 07:46, Ted Lemon <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I'm not in love with this as an end solution, but it has the advantage > > that the IAB controls .arpa, and so we can get an unsecure delegation > > right away assuming the IAB agrees. I see no reason to think they would > > not. It's a bit more typing, and there is the problem that the fourth > > google result for arpa is "Advanced Research Projects Agency. But it > > would work, and quickly, and would keep the whole process in the family. > > A third available option is to obtain a new âregularâ top-level domain > for IAB to control that has a better name than âarpa.â and use that for > the insecure delegation to the âhomeâ subdomain.
Do you mean a new GTLD with all the baggage that entails or a special name with a signed delegation in the root zone as apposed to a insecure delegation or some other mechanism? The problem with the regular GTLD process is that there is a upfront cost and annual costs as well as a whole guide book of rules which are inappropriate for this exercise. The special names process reserves the name. It is silent about adding delegations to the root zone (secure or insecure). Third mechanism ???? Mark > --james woodyatt <[email protected]> -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: [email protected]
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
