[DNSOP] Re: [Ext] Re: Call for Adoption: draft-davies-internal-tld

[Warren Kumari <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 12:11 PM, Kim Davies <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Petr,
>
> Quoting Petr Spacek on Tuesday April 22, 2025:
>
> The fact of the matter is that some people want "no delegation" and some
> people want "insecure delegation". That ship has sailed, and we ended up
> with "no delegation". DNSOP can´t change that.
>
> Just to clarify: Are you suggesting ICANN board cannot ever issue another
> resolution on this matter?
>
> I don't think that's true. We have a situation where SSAC specifically
> stated the domain should not be delegated in the root zone, it is a
> constraint that the ICANN Board codified in accepting SSAC's advice, and
> thus that is the constraint we have today.
>

Yes, that's the situation at the moment...


I have no insight into SSAC's deliberations but I think a reasonable take
> is that the prohibition was intended purely to provide assurance that name
> collisions would be avoided between private-use and labels that may be
> created inside an actual delegation from the root. A specialized delegation
> purely for a technical enablement reason (e.g. breaking the chain of trust)
> that is consistent with the intent may still be deemed consistent with the
> goal of SSAC's restriction. If that is the case I think superseding advice
> could be provided to clarify that aspect and adopted if there was a
> consensus that this made sense.
>


As the person who proposed this initially within SSAC, I believe that this
is correct.

I think that is entirely reasonable for the SSAC to provide a
clarification, and I can ask for time on the SSAC agenda to discuss this.
If the board (perhaps prompted by Tale's discussion) were to ask the SSAC,
that would likely result in a faster answer…

W


> kim
>
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>
>