--On Tuesday, 01 July, 2008 16:51 -0400 Thomas Narten <narten@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >... > Also, for TLDs like .local, one could also to some extent just > say "buyer beware". Anyone wanting a TLD that is known to not > be useable in practice (for some deployed software) would get > what they deserve. :-) The folk wanting TLDs presumably want > TLDs that can actually be used... >... Thomas, Pretend I'm a fine, upstanding, citizen who is in the domain names business (I guess that would make me a "domaineer" :-)) and whose business model is based on traffic concentration and redirection. I think I would really like to own "local", although not as much as I'd like to own "example.com" or any other name to which the IETF or various protocol designs provide free advertising and traffic direction. Every leaked name that might reference a web page would drive traffic to my site, as well as every action that led those who didn't know what was going on to open http://www.local./ to figure out what was going on. In a more sane world, no one rational would want to build a business or other activity around a TLD named "local". But this is demonstrably not a sane world. john _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf