In message <2DF1AFC7-643B-4610-8EB8-0616D3D0B024@xxxxxxxxx>, Ted Lemon writes: > On Jul 4, 2017, at 1:32 PM, william manning <chinese.apricot@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > I find Randys line of discussion mirroring my own thoughts. > > And to answer your question above, technically, the TLD org. is a > > member of the IN class, so in the OF class, it is credible to posit the > > existence of a org. TLD. TLDs are per class... :) > > Technically, yes. Would ICANN object? Id be astonished if they did not. > Is there any practical value in an alternative class hierarchy? No. So > its moot. Actually there is practical value in an alternative classes if only to make the type space effectively 32 bits and implicit with that is a alternative class hierarchy (delegation may exist in one that do not exist in the other and they may point to other servers). Who owns a name is a different question to what machines serve the <name,type,class> tuple and how do you reach those machines. There is absolutely no reason why the zones <name,IN> and <name,CLASS56> need to be served by the same machines. There is a argument for them both being under control of the same people. Mark > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@xxxxxxx