Re: [dns-wg] Elimination of 2nd level ccTLD domain names
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 874/2004 of 28 April 2004 http://europe.eu.int/cgi-bin/eur-lex/udl.pl?REQUEST=Seek-Deliver&LANGUAGE=en&SERVICE=eurlex&COLLECTION=oj&DOCID=2004l162p00400050
where - amongst other names - the 2 character codes of existing countries (article 8) are blocked
Which is short-sighted. What's the use of blocking only *existing* ccTLD codes, when nobody can foresee what new ccTLD codes may come to exist in the future? We've seen enough recent examples... Piet
At 1:19 PM +0200 2004-10-21, Piet Beertema wrote:
Which is short-sighted. What's the use of blocking only *existing* ccTLD codes, when nobody can foresee what new ccTLD codes may come to exist in the future? We've seen enough recent examples...
Okay, so block all two and three-letter SLDs, under the assumption that if they aren't already valid TLDs, they might become valid TLDs in the future. That would cause problems for ibm.eu, but would guarantee that you can prevent .com.eu from being registered (as one example). However, you'd then also have to block all four-letter SLDs, because there are current TLDs with four letters (.aero and .name). How far would you be willing to take this? -- Brad Knowles, <brad@stop.mail-abuse.org> "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755 SAGE member since 1995. See <http://www.sage.org/> for more info.
At 13:53 +0200 on 21 Oct (1098366806), Brad Knowles wrote:
Okay, so block all two and three-letter SLDs, under the assumption that if they aren't already valid TLDs, they might become valid TLDs in the future. That would cause problems for ibm.eu, but would guarantee that you can prevent .com.eu from being registered (as one example).
However, you'd then also have to block all four-letter SLDs, because there are current TLDs with four letters (.aero and .name).
...and six-letter words: .museum :) Blocking just the two-letter SLDs is still a reasonable policy; it solves the problem for the predictable case (ccTLDs). It doesn't prevent collisions with new gTLDs but that's not a reason to drop it entirely. Tim. -- Tim Deegan <tjd@phlegethon.org> We were back to the sad age-old knowledge that there are only two genuine aphrodisiacs: youth and boredom. [ Alistair Cooke, "Letter From America", 12/5/98 ]
At 1:01 PM +0100 2004-10-21, Tim Deegan wrote:
Blocking just the two-letter SLDs is still a reasonable policy; it solves the problem for the predictable case (ccTLDs). It doesn't prevent collisions with new gTLDs but that's not a reason to drop it entirely.
The ISO is going to run out of potential two-letter ccTLDs pretty soon. Two letters only give you 676 possible combinations and there are already almost 300 countries. It won't take too many more name changes or new countries being created out of old ones, before you start running out of possible combinations you can hand out that will have any bearing whatsoever on the actual name of the country. This is the same type of problem you have in most English-speaking countries with the name "smith" and chinese-speaking countries with the name "chang". It's also not unlike the Y2k problem. When they run out of two-letter ccTLDs that they can hand out, what do you think they're going to do? At the very least, any policy that prohibits two-letter SLDs (on the basis of potential conflicts with ccTLDs) should acknowledge this future problem. -- Brad Knowles, <brad@stop.mail-abuse.org> "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755 SAGE member since 1995. See <http://www.sage.org/> for more info.
The ISO is going to run out of potential two-letter ccTLDs pretty soon. Two letters only give you 676 possible combinations and there are already almost 300 countries.
Which means the number of countries could more than double before ISO would start running into troubles. My guess is that that won't happen in this century, perhaps not even in the next one. And by that time there may be no more ISO, Internet, e-mail etc. And the direct brain-to-brain communication envisaged for that era needs no 2-letter codes. ;-) Piet
At 2:24 PM +0200 2004-10-21, Piet Beertema wrote:
The ISO is going to run out of potential two-letter ccTLDs pretty soon. Two letters only give you 676 possible combinations and there are already almost 300 countries.
Which means the number of countries could more than double before ISO would start running into troubles.
Uh, no. Re-read that message again. I'm talking about clustering of names around certain common sequences of characters. Unless you want to hand out the ccTLDs in a totally random fashion, they will start running into collision problems much sooner than that. Most hashing algorithms start having problems when they get close to 50% full. There's no difference here. -- Brad Knowles, <brad@stop.mail-abuse.org> "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755 SAGE member since 1995. See <http://www.sage.org/> for more info.
On 21-okt-04, at 15:05, Brad Knowles wrote:
The ISO is going to run out of potential two-letter ccTLDs pretty soon. Two letters only give you 676 possible combinations and there are already almost 300 countries.
Which means the number of countries could more than double before ISO would start running into troubles.
Uh, no. Re-read that message again. I'm talking about clustering of names around certain common sequences of characters. Unless you want to hand out the ccTLDs in a totally random fashion, they will start running into collision problems much sooner than that.
It seems rather excessive to me to tell organizations such as IBM, NEC, JVC, MIT, JPL etc. that they can't register their name as a domain because in the future existing countries might want to rename / new ones may be formed and have ample choice of the abbreviation they get to use.
Most hashing algorithms start having problems when they get close to 50% full. There's no difference here.
No, except that this isn't a hash function. Besides, 2 character codes can easily be extended by allowing 0-9 as the second character, allowing for 936 combinations, which should be enough for a long time to come. And it's ISO's problem, not ours, anyway. Just curious: does anyone know how many gb/uk-like cases there are?
At 12:52 PM +0200 2004-10-24, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
Most hashing algorithms start having problems when they get close to 50% full. There's no difference here.
No, except that this isn't a hash function.
True, but that doesn't change the nature of the problem.
Besides, 2 character codes can easily be extended by allowing 0-9 as the second character, allowing for 936 combinations, which should be enough for a long time to come. And it's ISO's problem, not ours, anyway.
It's a problem that the ISO has created, but one we will have to live with. At the very least, we need to keep in mind upcoming future problems. The reason Y2k wasn't much of a problem was that people saw the issue looming, and many people around the world worked their butts off over a multi-year period of time to help ensure that everything would go smoothly. And overall, it did go reasonably smoothly. -- Brad Knowles, <brad@stop.mail-abuse.org> "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755 SAGE member since 1995. See <http://www.sage.org/> for more info.
At 14:12 +0200 on 21 Oct (1098367960), Brad Knowles wrote:
The ISO is going to run out of potential two-letter ccTLDs pretty soon. Two letters only give you 676 possible combinations and there are already almost 300 countries.
Good point. I don't think it's the same trade-off, though -- when the number of countries has about tripled, that will still only use 1/26 of the three-letter codes.
At the very least, any policy that prohibits two-letter SLDs (on the basis of potential conflicts with ccTLDs) should acknowledge this future problem.
How about: "At the present rate-of-change of ISO 3166-1, we must solve the problems mentioned in RFC 1535 at some time in the next six hundred years"? :) Tim. -- Tim Deegan <tjd@phlegethon.org> As far back as I can remember, soccer for me has been linked with the absence of purpose and the vanity of all things. [ Umberto Eco, "Faith in Fakes" ]
At 1:32 PM +0100 2004-10-21, Tim Deegan wrote:
How about: "At the present rate-of-change of ISO 3166-1, we must solve the problems mentioned in RFC 1535 at some time in the next six hundred years"? :)
See my other message. This is a problem that is looming much faster than you are giving it credit. -- Brad Knowles, <brad@stop.mail-abuse.org> "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755 SAGE member since 1995. See <http://www.sage.org/> for more info.
At 1:32 PM +0100 2004-10-21, Tim Deegan wrote: > How about: "At the present rate-of-change of ISO 3166-1, we must solve > the problems mentioned in RFC 1535 at some time in the next six hundred > years"? :) See my other message. This is a problem that is looming much faster than you are giving it credit. If it is a problem, there is nothing what we can do about it. You should turn to the ISO 3366-1 maintenance group or, alternatively, turn to ICANN that they change the current policy of using 3366-1 for accignment of cctld names. jaap
At the very least, any policy that prohibits two-letter SLDs (on the basis of potential conflicts with ccTLDs) should acknowledge this future problem.
How about: "At the present rate-of-change of ISO 3166-1, we must solve the problems mentioned in RFC 1535 at some time in the next six hundred years"? :)
Tim.
I see an April 1, 2005 RFC lurking here :-) -Hank
> At the very least, any policy that prohibits two-letter SLDs (on=20 > the basis of potential conflicts with ccTLDs) should acknowledge this=20 > future problem. How about: "At the present rate-of-change of ISO 3166-1, we must solve the problems mentioned in RFC 1535 at some time in the next six hundred years"? :) If I read 1535 correctly, it deals with setting up a correct search list for a resolver. It doesn't deal with ccTLD domains. jaap
At 11:14 +0200 on 27 Oct (1098875654), Jaap Akkerhuis wrote:
If I read 1535 correctly, it deals with setting up a correct search list for a resolver. It doesn't deal with ccTLD domains.
No, but it's relevant. The reason for refusing to register two-letter SLDs is to avoid having SLDs that are the same as existing or future (cc)TLDs, which would aggravate the search-list problem: "This is clearly unacceptable. Further, it could only be made worse with domains like COM.EDU, MIL.GOV, GOV.COM, etc." Tim. -- Tim Deegan <tjd@phlegethon.org> 31. The Minister may take such steps as he considers necessary for the destruction of any musk rats found at large. [ The Musk Rats Act, 1933 ]
Brad Knowles wrote:
The ISO is going to run out of potential two-letter ccTLDs pretty soon. Two letters only give you 676 possible combinations and there are already almost 300 countries.
650. Countries cannot have two letter identifiers begining with the letter x, so xa ... xz are ruled out. For more you can check: http://www.iso.org/iso/en/prods-services/iso3166ma/index.html
When they run out of two-letter ccTLDs that they can hand out, what do you think they're going to do?
Recycle. IIRC, CS used to symbolise Chechosolvakia (sp?) and now it stands for Serbia & Montenegro. -- Yiorgos Adamopoulos -- adamo@central.tee.gr Technical Chamber of Greece -- #include <std/disclaimer.h> Work Phone: +30.2103671130 -- FAX: +30.2103671101
At 4:59 PM +0300 2004-10-21, Yiorgos Adamopoulos wrote:
When they run out of two-letter ccTLDs that they can hand out, what do you think they're going to do?
Recycle. IIRC, CS used to symbolise Chechosolvakia (sp?) and now it stands for Serbia & Montenegro.
How long do you have to wait before you recycle? What if recycling still isn't enough to solve the collision problem for a given set of initial characters? -- Brad Knowles, <brad@stop.mail-abuse.org> "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755 SAGE member since 1995. See <http://www.sage.org/> for more info.
At 21:56 +0200 on 21 Oct (1098395800), Brad Knowles wrote:
How long do you have to wait before you recycle?
Five years, though apparently this is expected to be extended to fifty.
What if recycling still isn't enough to solve the collision problem for a given set of initial characters?
Some country gets an unfortunate two-letter code. They're not going to stop issuing ISO 3166-1 codes just because they run out of good matches. Tim. -- Tim Deegan <tjd@phlegethon.org> sooner or later end up singing a duet with Mr Blue Bird and other forest creatures, and then there's nothing for it but a flamethrower. [ Terry Pratchett, "Carpe Jugulum" ]
>> When they run out of two-letter ccTLDs that they can hand out, what >> do you think they're going to do? > > Recycle. IIRC, CS used to symbolise Chechosolvakia (sp?) and now it > stands for Serbia & Montenegro. How long do you have to wait before you recycle? What if recycling still isn't enough to solve the collision problem for a given set of initial characters? I've been told that there has been some discussions with the 3166-1 maintenance agency about this when the CS label got recycled. The agency is aware of the problems this might cause and has promised to adapt its policy. Basically, when recycling, wait years to reuse the old code. jaap
Which is short-sighted. What's the use of blocking only *existing* ccTLD codes, when nobody can foresee what new ccTLD codes may come to exist in the future? We've seen enough recent examples...
Okay, so block all two and three-letter SLDs, under the assumption that if they aren't already valid TLDs, they might become valid TLDs in the future. That would cause problems for ibm.eu, but would guarantee that you can prevent .com.eu from being registered (as one example).
I wouldn't go that far. I would block all 2-letter codes and the "historical" 3-letter codes. After all there's no rule for (new) generic TLD's. Piet
participants (7)
-
Brad Knowles -
Hank Nussbacher -
Iljitsch van Beijnum -
Jaap Akkerhuis -
Piet Beertema -
Tim Deegan -
Yiorgos Adamopoulos