Okay, that sounds like confirmation to me. All good then!
On 10-01-2025 11:29, Kazunori Fujiwara wrote:
From: Matthijs Mekking <matth...@pletterpet.nl>
I would use city.ise.mie.example instead, unless you have confirmation
that JPRS is fine with using .jp as an example here.
JP domain names have second-level, third-level, and fourth-level delegations,
but are provided through a single jp zone.
The structure of jp domain names is also published in the public suffix list.
Personally, I think it's okay to write down domain names that are
known to exist, as they are public information, and since they are
written in the draft, I don't think the impact would be much different
if they were written in the RFC.
What concerns me is that Ise City is not a very large local government,
and I don't think that being listed in the RFC will result in
storange quiries, but there may be people who are concerned about it.
These area third-level examples, but I think "jprs.co.jp" or
"wide.ad.jp" would be able to handle any issues.
# Other ccTLDs also have fourth-level delegations.
# For example: cnri.reston.va.us
--
Kazunori Fujiwara, JPRS <fujiw...@jprs.co.jp>
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list -- dnsop@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to dnsop-le...@ietf.org
