In message <20150527185621.1338.qm...@ary.lan>, "John Levine" writes:
> >Maybe those features are actually desirable. The real issue is expectations.
> For the vast
> >majority of uses dotless names are simply not an option as there are way too
> many built-in
> >expectations in pretty much ever
On 27 May 2015, at 20:22, Lyman Chapin wrote:
>> On May 26, 2015, at 3:48 PM, Francisco Obispo wrote:
>> I’m against withdrawing/reserving these names.
>
> Hi Francisco -
>
> We don't know each other, but if I may assume that you work for Uniregistry
> (apologies if I'm jumping to the wrong co
On May 26, 2015, at 3:48 PM, Francisco Obispo wrote:
>>
>> On May 26, 2015, at 11:50 AM, Lyman Chapin wrote:
>>
>> Hi Suzanne -
>>
>>> HOME/CORP/MAIL (draft-chapin-additional-reserved-tlds-02):
>>>
>>> * This is the most controversial of the RFC 6761 drafts and the one most
>>> driven by po
>Maybe those features are actually desirable. The real issue is expectations.
>For the vast
>majority of uses dotless names are simply not an option as there are way too
>many built-in
>expectations in pretty much every piece of software that deals with domain
>names.
On the other hand, have th
I want to thank the authors for keeping up with all the comments and
conversations on this draft, and putting together a new version.
We'd like to see some folks who have contributed text and opinions on
this draft to spend a few moments reviewing the list of changes.
https://www.ietf.org/r
