Re: [DNSOP] on private use TLDS

[Roy Arends <[e-mail]>]

> On 28 Nov 2019, at 22:30, Doug Barton <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> And if you don't think ICANN has promised to not delegate HOME, CORP, and MAIL; you didn't read the reference I provided. 

From section 3.2: "The deferral is not guaranteed to be forever”. That doesn’t read like a promise to not delegate HOME, CORP, and MAIL.

> Meanwhile, as many others have pointed out, and your side of the argument continues to ignore, ISO can choose to change those rules.

It is not that simple. While it is in ISO’s remit to change a category from User Assigned to another category, it is extremely improbable. A change to categories would force many active users of the standard such as ICAO, IATA, WIPO, UNLOCODE, UNICODE, Worldbank, Interpol, CABforum, and even the IETF and ISO itself to rename internally used strings. From their own ISO-3166 standard: "the ISO 3166/MA shall endeavour to maintain stability in the list of code elements.” 

As an example, say the ISO-3166 TC46 decides to reassign the X* range to countries, all the worlds financial services have to rewrite, re-map and re-issue monetary units and bonds, since ISO4217 makes use of ISO3166. (Take the CFA francs for instance, mapped to XAF and XOF, where XA and XO are used as intended since ISO4217 (the user of the ISO3166 standard) can allocated X* as they see fit). 

I have many examples of standard bodies using ISO3166 User Assigned ranges for private use.

> And if they do, we would have no recourse.

Why not?

The IANA has not blindly surrendered to ISO-3166. There are differences in the list of ccTLDs and ISO’s officially assigned code elements. 

> OTOH, we do have a means of working with ICANN to codify certain TLDs for private use. 

This is false. If you are referring to RFC 6761, then I suggest to read it again. Focus on the “special use” part of the text. While the result of reserving (say) “.private” has the desired effect (nxdomain forever), this is not the intent of RFC6761. 

Roy