Discuss mailing list

[Maiyannah Bishop <maiyannah AT highlandarrow.com>]

I mean, if we're having a vote, I vote yea
-mb

On 2016-12-03 17:23, Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:

Aaron J. Angel wrote:

spaesani,

You are correct that the RFC does not establish a list of two-letter codes to be used as ccTLDs. It also does not specify any more than a small number of gTLDs, yet we have plenty more than originally listed. It does, however, incorporate ISO 3316-1 alpha-2 by reference, which is also the only source for current two-letter TLDs. All other TLDs, even the new ones approved by ICANN, are more than two characters in length.

I find it difficult to support any other use for two-letter TLDs given that the list of country codes is an external source that is subject to revision, especially one with whose author we have no qualms. This is similar to the problem of new but overlapping ICANN-approved gTLDs, except that OpenNIC has a strong disliking, I think, to the way ICANN approves new gTLDs. This is not the case with the ISO country codes.

If your problem with limiting two-letter TLDs to ccTLDs is that we are absent a policy of disallowing any other use, I would be firmly on the side of establishing such a policy.

I had always believed that the RFCs required such a policy.  I support adopting a "all two-letter TLDs are reserved for ccTLDs" policy, with provisions that "country-like entities" may also be considered and that previously assigned country codes may remain valid.  (This proviso allows for .ll and .su to meet the criteria, for example.)

-- Jacob

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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature