[142131] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Sat Jun 18 05:42:00 2011
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <20110618084725.3E8F510E5622@drugs.dv.isc.org>
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 02:30:22 -0700
To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Jun 18, 2011, at 1:47 AM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>=20
> In message <201106180718.p5I7IrBe020792@mail.r-bonomi.com>, Robert =
Bonomi write
> s:
>>=20
>>> Subject: Re: ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs
>>> From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
>>>=20
>>> MacDonald's would likely get title to .macdonalds under the new =
rules,=20
>>> right?
>>>=20
>>> Well... Which MacDonald's?
>>>=20
>>> 1. The fast food chain
>>> 2. O.C. MacDonald's Plumbing Supply
>>> 3. MacDonald and Sons Paving Systems
>>> 4. MacDonald and Madison Supply Company
>>> 5. etc.
>>=20
>> Easy to resolve (excuse the pun) _that_ one.
>>=20
>> The _senior_ claimant to that domain would be Clan MacDonald, of =
Scotland.
>>=20
>> Who gets 'apple'? Apple (the computer company), Apple (the record =
company)?
>> How about the 'fruit of the month' club?
>>=20
>> Now, if you want a _hard_ problem, who gets to register 'YellowPages' =
?
>> <*EVIL* grin>
>=20
> YellowPages would work. It's used under licence.
>=20
> au.YellowPages
> uk.YellowPages
>=20
> As for single label hostnames, RFC 897 got rid of single label
> hostnames and they should not come back. They are a security issue,
> see RFC 1535.
>=20
> This has been pointed out in the past.
>=20
> Mark
> --=20
> Mark Andrews, ISC
> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
All true. However, since TLDs will now be run by anyone with $185k/year =
to get
what they want...
Owen
