Michael,
RFC1591 says that the IANA (Function Operator)
"[...]is not in the business of deciding what is and what is not a
country.
The selection of the ISO 3166 list as a basis for country code
top-level domain names was made with the knowledge that ISO has a
procedure for determining which entities should be and should not be
on that list."
What we call the 'ISO list' and the RFC calls the 'ISO 3166 list' is the
ISO Standard 3166-1 [1] establishing
"[...]an alphabetic 2-character (alpha-2) code[...]
The alpha-2 code uses combinations, in upper case, of two letters
of the 26-character Roman alphabet (ignoring diacritic signs) in the
range AB to QL, RA to WZ, and YA to ZY. Code elements AA, QM to QZ,
XA to XZ, and ZZ are not part of this part of ISO 3166."
As a ccTLD Manager I am satisfied that as long as the user-assigned code
elements AA, QM to QZ, XA to XZ, and ZZ do not become 'part of this part
of ISO 3166' the IANA Function Operator will NOT delegate (cc)TLDs
corresponding to the user-assigned code elements (into the root).
As it is extremely unlikely that any of the user-assigned code elements
will ever become 'part of this part of ISO 3166', I agree with Roy that
this is good enough for the purposes of this proposal.
I do not believe that it would make sense to select an arbitrary subset
from the user-assigned code elements for the purposes of this proposal.
greetings, el
[1] International Standards Organization: International Standard ISO
3166-1, Codes for the representation of names of countries and their
subdivisions – Part 1: Country codes. Version: 2013.
https://www.iso.org/iso-3166-country-codes.html
On 2020-06-16 01:16 , Roy Arends wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
>> On 14 Jun 2020, at 21:12, Michael StJohns <m...@nthpermutation.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Roy et al -
>>
>> Is there a document from ICANN taking a position on the assignment of
>> TLDs based on ISO3166 assignments?
>
> Yes:
> https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/icann-iso-3166-2012-05-09-en
>
> From that page:
>
> "In 2000, the ICANN Board of Directors recognized the ISO 3166
> Maintenance Agency as the authoritative entity for country code
> designations and officially adopted the use of ISO 3166-1 and the
> 3166-MA exceptional reserved list as the set of eligible designations
> for ccTLD assignment (September 2000)”
>
> Please note that:
>
> The ISO/TC46/WG2 “owns” ISO3166. Any substantial changes to it, need
> to go through TC46. The user-assigned two letter codes exist since
> the inception of the standard (15 december 1974).
>
> TC46/WG2 has designated the User-Assigned two letter codes to users of
> the ISO3166-1 standard (not to the Maintenance Agency!)
>
> TC46/WG2 refers the remaining codes to the Maintenance Agency for the
> assignment (Reserved, Assigned, Re-Assigned, Deleted, etc, etc) of two
> letter codes to country names.
>
> The ISO3166/MA has no authority over the User-Assigned two letter
> codes.
>
> It is naive to think that these policies, some of which pre-dates
> ICANN and even the Internet would be ignored by either ICANN or the
> ISO.
>
> I think it is safe to assume that these codes will never by delegated
> in the root zone.
>
>> When Jon was doing this he was adamant about following their lead -
>> rather than having to make political decisions about what was a
>> country. The main role he had was not the selection of the TLDs, but
>> making sure that the delegations went to the right organizations
>> related to the countries indicated by the TLD. I would say that ICANN
>> should probably have the same role.
>
> I agree.
>
>> Given that ISO has indicated a range of specifically NOT issued 2
>> letter codes, and that these codes will never (should never?) be
>> added to the root zone, I would suggest that it's probably not an
>> ICANN role to weigh in on this interpretation.
>
> I agree.
>
>> That said, I'd prefer it if the document selected a few (<=10) codes
>> from these ranges so that filtering may be built into various servers
>> and clients to prevent leakage.
>
> With all due respect, I’ll wait with responding about specifics until
> the WG has adopted the document (if at all).
>
> Warmly,
>
> Roy
--
Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse \ / Obstetrician & Gynaecologist
e...@lisse.na / * | Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell)
PO Box 8421 Bachbrecht \ / If this email is signed with GPG/PGP
10007, Namibia ;____/ Sect 20 of Act No. 4 of 2019 may apply
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
