Re: [DNSOP] Public Suffix List

Paul Hoffman <> Mon, 09 June 2008 23:51 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from [] (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8112E3A680D; Mon, 9 Jun 2008 16:51:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A06E63A67D8 for <>; Mon, 9 Jun 2008 16:51:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id K-8RjB6teOAc for <>; Mon, 9 Jun 2008 16:51:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:470:1f04:392::2]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D02AD3A67E4 for <>; Mon, 9 Jun 2008 16:51:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m59NpaLD034596 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 9 Jun 2008 16:51:37 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <p06240819c4736fb7df18@[]>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 16:51:02 -0700
To: Doug Barton <>, Gervase Markham <>
From: Paul Hoffman <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Public Suffix List
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

At 3:02 PM -0700 6/9/08, Doug Barton wrote:
>I'm also not sure you quite understand the magnitude of the task you're
>undertaking. It's a matter of fact that any sentence including the
>phrase "all TLDs" is doomed from the start. :)  You're dealing with a
>wide variety of business models (often with competing interests),
>policies, levels of technical ability, levels of operating capacity, and
>dare I say it, personalities. You will never get full cooperation, and
>as you can see by Stephane's response you will definitely irritate at
>least some of the TLD operators with this change. You might want to
>rethink socializing this concept before you launch.

Directly related to this is Mozilla's TLD-based IDN settings that Kim 
Davies mentioned at 
If you go to the Mozilla page listed in that message, you will notice 
that a few TLDs that allow IDNs have not registered with Mozilla for 
various reasons (*cough* *cough* .com, .ru, 
.many-countries-in-the-arab-speaking-world, ...). This is reasonably 
good and local proof that Mozilla asking TLDs for information for 
this new registry is likely to result in incomplete information for 
many important TLDs.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium
DNSOP mailing list