Hi, On Apr 28, 2021, at 5:38 AM, Jim Reid <j...@rfc1035.com> wrote: >> On 28 Apr 2021, at 13:24, Roy Arends <r...@dnss.ec> wrote: >> The working group can (after a potential clarification from the ISO about >> the future status of code elements) decide if a subset suffices and if so, >> the composition of the subset. > > I agree with this approach. > > IMO it’s reasonable for the WG to produce an RFC which says “If you need a > TLD for private use, pick from the two letter codes that ISO 3166 MA says > they’ll never allocate. Bear in mind if they later change their mind, you’ll > be on your own and could well be in a world of pain. Have a nice day.”.
I’d agree, with the slight modification of: “… if they later change their mind, you and any of the unmeasurable number of folks who happened to listen to ISO-3166/MA regarding the status of the user assigned codes will be on your own and could well be in a world of pain.” (Only half :) — the reality is that lots of folks use the user assigned codes for all sorts of reasons and if they’re repurposed, it’s probably going to be a mess). Regards, -drc (Speaking for myself)
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
