[dns-wg] {Use of} the INT TLD {by the NCC and others} [Re: RIPE NCC DNSSEC trust anchors]

On 11/13/14 2:07 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> On 13/11/2014 21:21, David Conrad wrote:
>> Can we just ask for RIPE.INT to be dropped from the .INT zone?
>
> there isn't enough bikeshed in the universe to handle a suggestion like this.

Nick,

But that's just the point, it doesn't have to be a bikeshed. RIPE and 
APNIC can simply ask ICANN to un-delegate the names, and then we're done.

And regarding Peter's point, this is the *perfect* time for them to do 
so. It helps reinforce the point that the bottom-up stakeholder model 
works, because people of good will are willing and able to do the right 
thing.

There is no reason for those names to exist now, in spite of the 
historical reasons that they were created in the past. The only way this 
turns into a bikeshed is if RIPE and APNIC don't agree to do the right 
thing and drop the names.

Doug

PS, I'm not sure you're using the term 'bikeshed' in the right context 
there. Have a look at 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_law_of_triviality