...

...

...

...

"Tim" == Tim Deegan <tjd-dnswg@phlegethon.org> writes:

Tim> No, but it's relevant. The reason for refusing to register Tim> two-letter SLDs is to avoid having SLDs that are the same as Tim> existing or future (cc)TLDs, which would aggravate the Tim> search-list problem: Tim> "This is clearly unacceptable. Further, it could only be Tim> made worse with domains like COM.EDU, MIL.GOV, GOV.COM, etc." In that case, perhaps someone could start a thread on Why Search Lists Are Evil? Maybe then we could finally bring this discussion to a close. As Peter already said, how a TLD structures its name space (or not) and determines what names can be registered there is a local policy issue. It is not an appropriate topic for this list or the WG. Let's suppose the WG considered this subject, reached consensus and published a RIPE document. [Yes, I know this is fantasy but bear with me.] Would any TLD care? Would they annoy their users by forcing them to rename already registered domains to comply with this document? The reality is there already are lots of SLDs in use today that have labels that are TLDs. <TLD>.com exists for just about every TLD, including com.com. (Sigh.) If this creates problems for broken resolvers and unwise search lists, then the way to fix that is to solve the underlying misconfigurations. Tinkering with the name space or treating some labels as "special" is the wrong approach. I now ask everyone to please stop posting on this thread. The discussion is not appropriate for this list and isn't a suitable subject for the WG. If you disagree with this, please send mail to dns-wg-chair@ripe.net -- not this list! -- explaining why the discussion should continue and its relevance to the WG.