That is not an option for this working group. Whether or not it is a good idea is another topic, but that option is definitely not an option for this working group, because it is not in our charter. If some other working group _had already gotten_ such a TLD, then we could talk about using it, but placing such a process in the critical path doesn't make sense.
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 4:30 PM, james woodyatt <[email protected]> wrote: > On Dec 12, 2016, at 12:25, Mark Andrews <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Third mechanism ???? > > > Basically, I’m trying to point out that if you don’t like “Advanced > Research Projects Agency” showing up in searches on the gTLD part of > Home.gTLD when gTLD=arpa, then you can fix that whole class of problem for > every IETF working, not just us, by obtaining a new gTLD and using a new > subdomain of that instead. That’s the third option available. Not saying > it’s a good one. Just that it isn’t one or the other. > > Get you a domain that does both: 1) puts the insecure delegation into a > zone controlled by IAB, and 2) avoids using the confusing “arpa" gTLD. > > > --james woodyatt <[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
