Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-arends-private-use-tld

[Michael StJohns <[e-mail]>]

Roy et al -

Is there a document from ICANN taking a position on the assignment of 
TLDs based on  ISO3166 assignments?

When Jon was doing this he was adamant about following their lead - 
rather than having to make political decisions about what was a 
country.  The main role he had was not the selection of the TLDs, but 
making sure that the delegations went to the right organizations related 
to the countries indicated by the TLD.   I would say that ICANN should 
probably have the same role.

Given that ISO has indicated a range of specifically NOT issued 2 letter 
codes, and that these codes will never (should never?) be added to the 
root zone, I would suggest that it's probably not an ICANN role to weigh 
in on this interpretation.

That said, I'd prefer it if the document selected a few (<=10) codes 
from these ranges so that filtering may be built into various servers 
and clients to prevent leakage.

Later, Mike



On 6/14/2020 2:09 PM, Roy Arends wrote:
> Hi
>
>> On 14 Jun 2020, at 14:59, S Moonesamy <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Roy, Ed,
>> At 08:12 AM 12-06-2020, Tim Wicinski wrote:
>>> Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption by DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view.
>> It is difficult for me to take a position on the adoption of this draft as I don't have enough information to do that.  I have a few questions:
>>
>> I took a quick look at the draft.  There is a request to Public Technical Identifiers in Section 6.  Isn't that beyond DNS operations?
> This request has been removed from draft -02.
>
> Warmly,
>
> Roy
>
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop