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

[Paul Hoffman <[e-mail]>]

> It's a reasonable question, but I think a reasonable answer in some circimstances is "yes".
> 
> Let's say we found that there's some online thing we never heard of before, but it turns out that 100,000,000 people in India and China use it, it uses private names in .SECRET, and people looking at DNS logs confirm that they're seeing leakage of .SECRET names.  Beyond rolling our eyes and saying we wish they hadn't done that, what else should we do? Why shouldn't we reserve it?  The number of possible TLDs is effectively unlimited, striking one more off the list that might be sold in the future doesn't matter.  This is engineering, not ideally what we might have done with a blank slate, but the best we can do under the circumstances.

Let's say it is only 100,000 people. Then what?

What if it is name that makes some sense both as a private name and a public name? Like ".ibm"? (For those not following along, .ibm is a new TLD that is recently allocated.)

Instead of throwing out narrow examples, it might help the WG to have some specific goals.

- Will the IETF require some specific metrics for RFC 6761 reservations?

  - If yes, what are those metrics?

  - If no, who makes the non-specific decision?

>> Furthermore, given that ICANN has already said they won’t delegate these names in particular, how is it helpful for the IETF to also add them to the Special Use Names registry?
> 
> I believe that they're currently blocked in the current new gTLD round, but not necessarily beyond that.  

According to <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/name-collision-ro-faqs-2014-08-01-en>: "The delegation of .CORP, .HOME and .MAIL has been deferred indefinitely. ICANN will collaborate with the technical and security communities to determine the best way to handle these strings in the long term."

--Paul Hoffman