On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 9:56 AM, Livingood, Jason < jason_living...@cable.comcast.com> wrote:
> On 5/6/15, 2:07 PM, "Suzanne Woolf" <suzworldw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > c) The requests we're seeing for .onion and the other p2p names > already in use are arguing that they should get their names to enable their > technologies with minimal disruption to their installed base. While the > requesters may well have valid need for the names to be recognized, there > is still a future risk of name collision or other ambiguity. The IETF is > being asked to recognize the pre-existing use of these names. Does this > scale to future requests? > > > Beyond that, does it end up being a cheap way to avoid the ICANN process > of creating a new gTLD. For example, I am not aware that anything prevents > the ToR project from applying to ICANN for the .onion gTLD. So from one > perspective, would more people just deploy into an unused namespace and > then later lay claim the the namespace retroactively based on their use > (gTLD-squatting)? This could be quite messy at scale, and I am not sure the > IETF has a process to deal with and consider competing uses. > > Registering .onion would prevent others from using it. But the other thing that they really want is for .onion names to never to be sent to DNS, for privacy reasons, and registering the name does not solve that. In a sense the special-use registry is the opposite of registering a domain name - it says this name should never be sent to DNS. -- Bob Harold
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
