On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 1:56 PM, John Levine <johnl@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >>It therefore seems to me to be not a bad idea to have an RFC or IANA >>registry for the "reserved names", in ICANN parlance. It would also >>be good if some operational rules about what "reserved names" means >>were in an RFC somewhere (for instance, are there different classes >>of "reserved" names? Why? > > Yes, that's what I'm trying to get at. As far as I can tell, there > are at least three different kinds of reserved names. Names like > .INVALID and .TEST are reserved forever and will never be delegated. > Names like .IETF and .RIPE are names of identified Internet > infrastructure organizations who could in principle have the name > delegated to them. Names like .QQ are reserved until some third party > (ISO 3166 in this case) says something about them. Remove the leading dots, ICANN and IANA related names are reserved at 2nd and all levels. Current registry agreement says: "Labels Reserved at All Levels. The following names shall be reserved at the second level and at all other levels within the TLD at which Registry Operator makes registrations" Jorge _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf