Re: [dns-wg] Elimination of 2nd level ccTLD domain names

[Jim Reid <]

>>>>> "Tim" == Tim Deegan tjd-dnswg@localhost writes:

    Tim> No, but it's relevant.  The reason for refusing to register
    Tim> two-letter SLDs is to avoid having SLDs that are the same as
    Tim> existing or future (cc)TLDs, which would aggravate the
    Tim> search-list problem:

    Tim>    "This is clearly unacceptable.  Further, it could only be
    Tim> made worse with domains like COM.EDU, MIL.GOV, GOV.COM, etc."

In that case, perhaps someone could start a thread on Why Search Lists
Are Evil? Maybe then we could finally bring this discussion to a close.

As Peter already said, how a TLD structures its name space (or not)
and determines what names can be registered there is a local policy
issue. It is not an appropriate topic for this list or the WG.

Let's suppose the WG considered this subject, reached consensus and
published a RIPE document. [Yes, I know this is fantasy but bear with
me.] Would any TLD care? Would they annoy their users by forcing them
to rename already registered domains to comply with this document?

The reality is there already are lots of SLDs in use today that have
labels that are TLDs. <TLD>.com exists for just about every TLD,
including com.com. (Sigh.) If this creates problems for broken
resolvers and unwise search lists, then the way to fix that is to
solve the underlying misconfigurations. Tinkering with the name space
or treating some labels as "special" is the wrong approach.

I now ask everyone to please stop posting on this thread. The
discussion is not appropriate for this list and isn't a suitable
subject for the WG. If you disagree with this, please send mail to
dns-wg-chair@localhost -- not this list! -- explaining why the
discussion should continue and its relevance to the WG.