Re: [DNSOP] new version submitted for draft-arends-private-use-tld

Hi Partick

> On 7 May 2020, at 19:40, Patrick Mevzek <mevzek@uniregistry.com> wrote:
> 
> On 02/05/2020 09:09, Roy Arends wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Ed and I just submitted a new version of our private-use TLD draft. 
>> 
>> https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-arends-private-use-tld-01.txt
> 
> While I do not have hard facts but just a gut feeling, I would feel
> safer if "xn" is excluded from the possible list of private labels to be
> used in the DNS, as it is used for prefix of IDNs.

That is a good point. I won’t go as far as excluding it, but I will add a warning.

> 
> Some, probably buggy, software could match on "xn" instead of "xn--" as
> prefix to search for IDNs, and hence having "example.xn" could lead to
> problems.

I agree.

> 
>> This draft has substantial more information than the first draft. It explains that a private-use namespace does not exist, why it is needed, and how a namespace aligned with the user-assigned alpha-2 code elements in the ISO-3166-1 standard can be used as private-use namespace.
>> 
>> It contains plenty of examples of how user-assigned code elements are used in the field, including other ISO standards, the UN, UNICODE, CAB/forum, and the IETF itself.
>> 
>> This new version came about after fruitful discussions with peers inside and outside the IETF. Most discussions were productive. This has lead to the removal of the advice/example to use ZZ, as it was distracting from the point of the draft: these two-letter top level domains are available for private-use. 
> 
> Thanks for the new draft version, the new content is useful indeed.

Thanks Patrick.

Warmly,

Roy

> 
> -- 
> Patrick Mevzek
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop