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

[Thomas Narten <narten at us.ibm.com>]

Joe Abley <jabley at ca.afilias.info> writes:

> A better approach, I think, would be for proposed TLDs to pass  
> technical review through some suitable body who could consider each  
> case on its merits.

As in https://par.icann.org/files/paris/gTLDUpdateParis-23jun08.pdf,
starting at chart 11? 

Also, for TLDs like .local, one could also to some extent just say
"buyer beware". Anyone wanting a TLD that is known to not be useable
in practice (for some deployed software) would get what they
deserve. :-) The folk wanting TLDs presumably want TLDs that can
actually be used...

That said, I would expect requests for TLDs that would cause real
technical or operational problems to be turned down. There is a step
in the process for input of the form "um, bad idea because..."

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com> writes:

> I think all the external evidence is that ICANN is deeply reluctant to
> set up mechanisms that require the application of common sense (a.k.a.
> judgment) as to whether or not a particular domain name may be
> registered.

Perhaps I've had too much of the Kool Aid, but there are steps in
place that are intended to catch potential technical/operational
problems with proposed TLDs. Maintaining DNS stability is a core theme
that appears throughout ICANN.

David Conrad <drc at virtualized.org> writes:

> On Jun 30, 2008, at 5:43 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
> > The other two things that seem to be getting lost in this discussion  
> > is that one can write all of the RFCs one like, but rules like this  
> > are ultimately useless unless ICANN agrees to them

> ICANN has already deferred to the IETF on technical matters (see  
> IDNs).  I'm unclear why ICANN would ignore IETF technical input on  
> this matter.

I'll second that. If the IETF were to say "bad idea" for any
particular TLD (or class of TLDs), I think ICANN would listen.

Thomas
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf