This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/dns-wg@ripe.net/
>>: Re: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs
- Previous message (by thread): >>: Re: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs
- Next message (by thread): >>: Re: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Peter Koch
pk at DENIC.DE
Thu Nov 2 12:10:26 CET 2006
On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 01:50:10PM +0300, Max Tulyev wrote: > Yeah, I see the big difference and using double-standards about two > domains SU/EU are both not in ISO list :( > > But hope we can help to move it right way ;) ... provided "we" != dns-wg, I guess. As David Conrad suggested, the policy issues are best dealt with through ICANN channels. What this WG could address are the operational requirements and consequences: 1) Is there an operational reason to phase out a TLD? 2) If a TLD were to be phased out, what precautions need to be taken? What are cleanup steps and how much name space poison will remain? Both voluntary and involuntary changes of domain name "ownership" do happen already and the question of phasing out the TLD is particluarly interesting only to the extent that the TLD is "different". -Peter
- Previous message (by thread): >>: Re: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs
- Next message (by thread): >>: Re: [dns-wg] retiring old ccTLDs
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]