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

From: David Conrad <drc at virtualized.org>
To: Marshall Eubanks <tme at multicasttech.com>
Cc: ietf at ietf.org
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 11:51:42 -0700
In-reply-to: <4C0AE13D-4CA6-4989-A6B0-555A014DE464 at multicasttech.com>
References: <4C0AE13D-4CA6-4989-A6B0-555A014DE464 at multicasttech.com>

Hi,

On Jun 27, 2008, at 11:43 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:

I am curious as to  whether others feel like this is a potential
problem to be addressed (and, not least, whether there is a bettermail list for this discussion).

I believe an RFC that provides an IETF-defined list of names (beyondthe 4 in 2606) and/or rules defining names the "Internet technicalcommunity" feels would be inappropriate as top-level domains would bequite helpful.


Regards,
-drc
(speaking personally)
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Update of RFC 2606 based on the recent ICANN changes ?
  - From: SM

References:
- Update of RFC 2606 based on the recent ICANN changes ?
  - From: Marshall Eubanks

Prev by Date: Update of RFC 2606 based on the recent ICANN changes ?
Next by Date: SHOULD vs MUST case sensitivity
Previous by thread: Update of RFC 2606 based on the recent ICANN changes ?
Next by thread: Re: Update of RFC 2606 based on the recent ICANN changes ?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

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

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.