Re: Defining the existence of non-existent domains

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

 



On 2009-12-27, at 20:16, John Levine wrote:

> It seems to me that if we think it's a good idea to specify a domain
> name that doesn't exist, we're better off clarifying the status of the
> ones already specified rather than inventing new ones.  Since the
> people who manage .ARPA are the exact same people who manage the root
> (IANA, operated by ICANN, in both cases), one is as likely to flake as
> the other.

Operational management is not what I was talking about (assuming it was my recent comments that triggered that observation). I was expressing concern over policy. I think the policy that governs the administration of the ARPA zone is far easier to characterise in an IETF context than that of the root zone.

> In fact, ICANN is quite aware of the reserved names list.  In the
> current draft of the application process, one of the steps is to
> check to see if a proposed name is one of the Reserved ones, in which
> case the application fails immediately.  Here's their reserved list:
> 
> AFRINIC      IANA-SERVERS NRO
> ALAC         ICANN        RFC-EDITOR
> APNIC        IESG         RIPE
> ARIN         IETF         ROOT-SERVERS
> ASO          INTERNIC     RSSAC
> CCNSO        INVALID      SSAC
> EXAMPLE*     IRTF         TEST*
> GAC          ISTF         TLD
> GNSO         LACNIC       WHOIS
> GTLD-SERVERS LOCAL        WWW
> IAB          LOCALHOST
> IANA         NIC

Again, I am not involved in existing or proposed future policy for the root zone, but I'm confused as to what you are attempting to achieve through draft-levine-reserved-names-registry-00.

If you're proposing to ICANN that they cede control over the reserved names list for the root zone to an IANA registry controlled by an IETF process (RFC publication, according to your current text), then this doesn't seem like the venue to propose that.

If you're proposing that the IETF document a list of names that has change control and authorship homed within ICANN, then I'm not sure what the benefit of that is.

If you're making some other proposal, then I am currently missing it.

Could you explain?


Joe

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
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]