Re: [DNSOP] Seeking discussion of draft-ietf-dnsop-cookies-01

2015-05-03 Thread Shane Kerr
Evan, On Friday, 2015-05-01 23:21:30 +, Evan Hunt wrote: > Speaking for myself, I agree with Mark: the benefits of including > error codes in the option are slim and other mechanisms such as > FORMERR work just as well in almost every scenario, so it doesn't > justify the cost in additional c

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-terminology-01.txt

2015-05-03 Thread David Conrad
Patrik, >>> Also note that there are ccTLDs allocated for codes that are not registered >>> in ISO3166 (UK, EU etc). >> >> IIUC these two are on the 3166 list as exceptionally reserved codes. > > Yes, but not REGISTERED, and that difference is something that created more > than just a little b

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-terminology-01.txt

2015-05-03 Thread David Conrad
Hi, > From the point of view of the DNS, there is no difference between a > ccTLD and a gTLD. This distinction is relevant only for policies. Not quite true. From the perspective of the protocol, a TLD is a TLD. From the point of view of the system, a ccTLD is different than a gTLD, e.g., the o

Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-terminology-01.txt

2015-05-03 Thread Patrik Fältström
On 4 May 2015, at 3:22, David Conrad wrote: > Patrik, > Also note that there are ccTLDs allocated for codes that are not registered in ISO3166 (UK, EU etc). >>> >>> IIUC these two are on the 3166 list as exceptionally reserved codes. >> >> Yes, but not REGISTERED, and that difference is

[DNSOP] EU ISO-3166 code (was Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-terminology-01.txt)

2015-05-03 Thread David Conrad
[This has drifted a ways off from DNS terminology, so I changed the subject] Patrik, Sorry, I'm a bit confused. > What ISO 3166/MA said was that the _only_ difference between the two, and the > reason why they reacted on .EU, was that ICANN referred to .EU being reserved > as a reason for regi

Re: [DNSOP] EU ISO-3166 code (was Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-terminology-01.txt)

2015-05-03 Thread Patrik Fältström
On 4 May 2015, at 5:25, David Conrad wrote: > [This has drifted a ways off from DNS terminology, so I changed the subject] Thanks! Note that if we look at the original discussion, my only point is that we should not claim ccTLDs are only allocated according to ISO 3166, but that there is freed

Re: [DNSOP] EU ISO-3166 code (was Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-terminology-01.txt)

2015-05-03 Thread Patrik Fältström
On 4 May 2015, at 7:16, Patrik Fältström wrote: > I.e. 3166/MA is very careful with it not being the ones that register codes. Let me add...but they have not been so careful with what codes they reserve. Remember that in those days the list of reserved codes was not public (although IANA did ha