Re: Update of RFC 2606 based on the recent ICANN changes ?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 12:54:24PM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
> > I don't "want" anything in this space.  I don't care if the root's
> > unchanged or as wide as .com.
> 
> 	There was a clear decision to move from a single label
> 	hostnames to multiple label hostnames (RFC 921).  You are
> 	attempting to reverse that decision.

I've said everything I want to say about this topic, but I'd like to
reiterate that I'm not attempting to reverse any decision.  I have no
hidden agenda and I am not advocating a policy position based on
technical and conceptual feasibility (or anything else).

I don't care which one the community picks here.  I've now asserted it
twice.

I don't care which one the community picks here.  Now it's true.

-- 
Ted Faber
http://www.isi.edu/~faber           PGP: http://www.isi.edu/~faber/pubkeys.asc
Unexpected attachment on this mail? See http://www.isi.edu/~faber/FAQ.html#SIG

Attachment: pgpwvdu6xNgAy.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]