> On Oct 20, 2014, at 9:30 PM, Bill Woodcock <wo...@pch.net> wrote: > > > On Oct 21, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Jared Mauch <ja...@puck.nether.net> wrote: > >> Breaking tons of things is an interesting opinion of "why not”. > > Eh. Off the top of my head, I see two categories of breakage: > > 1) things that hard-code a list of “real” TLDs, and break when their > expectations aren’t met, and > > 2) things that went ahead and trumped up their own non-canonical TLDs for > their own purposes. > > Neither of those seem like practices worth defending, to me. Not worth going > out of one’s way to break, either, but… > > And in the latter case, like “alternate roots,” that’s not an argument > against creating more TLDs… They’ve already been created. It’s an argument > against doing so in an uncoordinated manner, which is the source of the > breakage.
I’ve had operational issues introduced by *TLD operators and choices they made. I’m not going to document them here, but by using the root zone as a dumping ground for vanity addresses (e.g.: .google) highlights something that can be properly dealt with through normal processes. The number of things which will change from a predictable result to a unpredictable result (similar to when someone decided to wildcard .com) will continue to increase. Thankfully we can now receive email from spammer@example.google as it properly resolves and validates(!). (this is just one example). - Jared
