Re: [dnsext] s/ZS/NI/

[Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@abenaki.wabanaki.net>]

we already have a reserved list, so as a rule, future tld applications 
shouldn't use existing (also in the heady future) RR types, or small 
trains that other kids are known to play with.

Kim Davies wrote:
> On 11/25/08 2:57 PM, "Mark Andrews" <Mark_Andrews@isc.org> wrote:
>   
> > > > Maybe expand it to NINFO?
> > > >         
> > > Sure. Whatever. :-)
> > >       
> >         And with ICANN's plans to expand the root we may well see
> >         NINFO as a TLD.
> >     
>
> Is there any strong justification for reserving RR types against being TLDs
> (or vice versa)? If so, now would be a rather good time to discuss it before
> any future TLD policy is crystalised.
>
> kim
>
>
> --
> to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
> the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
> archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>
>
>
>   

--
to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>