IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] on private use TLDS

Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> Tue, 26 November 2019 10:46 UTC

Return-Path: <jim@rfc1035.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFA5E1208C5 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Nov 2019 02:46:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HJYXTjEG9Tph for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Nov 2019 02:46:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shaun.rfc1035.com (shaun.rfc1035.com [93.186.33.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1E231200E9 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Nov 2019 02:46:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [156.106.233.94] (unknown [156.106.233.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shaun.rfc1035.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4C6602421173; Tue, 26 Nov 2019 10:46:14 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com>
In-Reply-To: <B679F326-54A0-4010-BD41-F2F317417169@dnss.ec>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 10:46:13 +0000
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <95832760-29D1-4938-9305-F21BB7D7D315@rfc1035.com>
References: <B679F326-54A0-4010-BD41-F2F317417169@dnss.ec>
To: Roy Arends <roy@dnss.ec>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/_dbigTviVQsPqD9l5kAUC5WVhWc>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] on private use TLDS
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 10:46:19 -0000


> On 26 Nov 2019, at 10:18, Roy Arends <roy@dnss.ec> wrote:
> 
> "Is it safe to use ISO3166-1 Alpha-2 code elements from the User Assigned range as top level domains for my own private use?"
> 
> ...
> It is my understanding that the ISO3166 Maintenance Agency can not re-assign codes from the User Assigned range. This needs an action from ISO TC46. 

It would be prudent to assume that there is a possibility, no matter how remote, that codes from the User Assigned range could get re-assigned one day. Whoever made the current policy could well change it.*

So if your idea goes forward, I think there needs to be some text which explains this. ie User Assigned 3166 codes *might* be OK for private use today; that list of code points is subject to change even if that's highly unlikely; plan accordingly just in case your private use two-letter code gets repurposed.

* I read documents in the late 90s, albeit not from SDOs, telling companies to anchor their internal name space under .corp because it was impossible for that TLD to ever exist in the public Internet. This was before ICANN was formed.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email