On Jan 27, 2014, at 11:40 PM, Stuart Cheshire wrote:
> On 8 Jan, 2014, at 10:18, Suzanne Woolf wrote:
>
>> Colleagues,
>>
>> This new internet-draft is another request for additions to the RFC 6761
>> special names registry, this time motivated by an interest in reserving the
>> names most c
On Apr 29, 2015, at 6:39 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On Apr 29, 2015, at 2:44 PM, Suzanne Woolf wrote:
>> I'm suggesting a new definition in Sec. 2, as follows:
>>
>> "Label -- The portion of a domain name at each node in the tree making up a
>> fully-qualified domain name"
>
> Works for me.
On May 13, 2015, at 6:05 PM, David Conrad wrote:
> John,
>
>> On May 13, 2015, at 1:51 PM, John Levine wrote:
>>> The distinction I'm making suggests why corp and onion seem different.
>>> They are, in this
>>> fundamental resolution nature.
>>
>> I was under the impression that part of the
On May 14, 2015, at 11:21 AM, David Conrad wrote:
>
> However, as I said, how it is labeled is somewhat irrelevant. What matters to
> me is figuring out the objective criteria by which we can determine whether
> and/or how a particular label is being used so much that its delegation in
> the
On May 14, 2015, at 4:10 PM, David Conrad wrote:
> Lyman,
>
>> I understand the desire to have objective criteria, but in this case your
>> call for a bright-line distinction between "dangerous" and "not dangerous"
>> labels is an obvious red herring.
>
> It's not so obvious to me that danger
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 policy concerns
It is not driven by policy concerns; it is driven by operational concerns, and
I have heard almost no one in the WG
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 controversi
On May 28, 2015, at 11:17 AM, Suzanne Woolf wrote:
> (no hats, as I haven't discussed with my co-chair and AD.)
>
> On May 27, 2015, at 3:22 PM, Lyman Chapin wrote:
>
>> We don't know each other, but if I may assume that you work for Uniregistry
>> (apo
