It wasn't particularly clear which later message in this thread to respond to so I'm replying to the first. If anyone is interested, I happen to know John Postel's opinion on this matter. If you look at early drafts of RFC 2606, such as https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-dnsind-test-tlds-06.txt you will see a lot more tld's including some of these reserved country codes. John reject all those saying that, regardless of what the ISO standards currently said, the IETF couldn't constrain any two letter tld's without a clear prior agreement from ISO.
Thanks, Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA d3e...@gmail.com On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 7:27 PM, John Levine <jo...@taugh.com> wrote: > I don't think this has anything to do with RFC 6761, so ... > > For a very long time, two letter TLDs have been assigned to countries > and other geographic entities per the ISO 3166 alpha-2 list. The > earliest mention I can find is in RFC 920 in 1984, and even then the > wording suggests that the usage was well settled. > > The codes AA, QM-QZ, XA-XZ, and ZZ are "user assigned" and will never > be used for countries. Last year Ed Lewis wrote an I-D proposing that > XA-XZ be made private use and the rest future use, but as far as I can > tell it never went anywhere. > > I've been telling people that if they need a fake private TLD for their > local > network they should use one of those since it is exceedingly unlikely > ever to collide with a real DNS name. Am I right? > > R's, > John > > PS: On my lan, I'm using .QY. > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
