Re: [DNSOP] Interim DNSOP WG meeting on Special Use Names: some reading material

[Edward Lewis <[e-mail]>]

On 5/7/15, 11:41, "John Levine" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>ICANN has a whole bunch of rules that mandate that once you've paid
>the $185,000, you have to deploy a DNSSEC signed zone on multiple
>servers, implement elaborate reservation and trademark claiming rules,
>takedown processes, WHOIS servers, and so forth.  In the recent TLD
>application round there was one applicant that only wanted to reserve
>the domain (they were apparently concerned that someone else would
>squat ...

My thought (as I wasn't in ICANN when the 2012 new TLD program was
established, etc.) is that the process in place was built to allow the
establishment of operating TLDs with all of "those" concerns.  As opposed
to being a process by which to reserve "strings" (labels) that would not
"be in" (delegated/have whois servers/registration interfaces/etc) the
root zone, i.e., for the purpose of squatting to prevent collisions.

The problem (the topic of discussion here) I see is that there are class
of strings that are intended to not be active in the DNS and further more,
the DNS isn't even meant to be consulted.  The closest process in place
today to achieving this is the Special Use Names registry - and I
emphasize "closest" recognizing that if it was "perfect" we wouldn't be
having an interim meeting in a few days time.

I may be wrong...but this is how I see view the topic.  (I.e., not a
statement on behalf of ICANN.)