>>: Re: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs

Max,

On Nov 2, 2006, at 3:14 AM, Max Tulyev wrote:
> Seems to be reasonable. Could you please advice us a right place (mail
> list?) to continue discussing political issues?

You have a few choices. Assuming you want to pursue redefining IANA's  
ccTLD policy:

ICANN's ccNSO: http://ccnso.icann.org
wwTLD: http://www.wwtld.org/
CENTR: https://www.centr.org/

If you want to pursue a gTLD or sTLD like .CIS (which I suspect may  
be easier even despite the fact that the policy for creating new  
gTLDs has not yet been finalized):

http://gnso.icann.org/

> There is _NO_ operational reasons to phase out at least SU. It is
> operational now and is growing fast. Is somebody disagree with me?

What happens when ISO-3166 MA reallocates SU to "South  
Ulalaville" (as they reallocated CS from "Czechoslovakia" to "Serbia  
and Montenegro")?  IANA has no control over what ISO 3166 MA does and  
the potential for this sort of reallocation is non-neglible.  This  
would seem to be an operational issue to me.  The American  
colloquialism is "you are living on borrowed time"...

Rgds,
-drc