Discuss mailing list

[Tim Groeneveld <tim AT timg.ws>]

I wrote an answer about this on stack overflow:

http://stackoverflow.com/a/21872376

Thanks,
Tim

---- On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 10:39:31 +1100 jonaharagon AT gmail.com wrote ----

I personally suspect ICANN just didn't think it was necessary at the time gTLDs were designed, and nowadays single letter domains would be far too valuable to delegate to any company :)

In any case, one letter domains should be fine and I'm going to submit a new proposal for .o soon, as I like that option the best.

Jonah

On Nov 18, 2016 5:34 PM, "Maiyannah Bishop" <maiyannah.bishop AT postactiv.com> wrote:

I imagine OpenNic's existence to begin with causes ICANN to have 'moments' ;-)

I could support a .o or other single-letter TLD.  I'm not sure how popular it would be, but that's no reason not to allow it, and I can find nothing in RFCs or otherwise in the approval track specifically regarding single-letter TLDs.  I think this seems "okay" - or at the very least, something they didn't think of - and if it is something they didn't consider, all the better for us.
-mb

On 2016-11-18 18:23, Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:

I expect ICANN to throw a tantrum and declare all single-letter TLDs "reserved", but we should not care.  I could support a .o. TLD.

--------
You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org

--------
You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org