[dns-operations] keeping ICANN busy

[Mike Jones]

On 22 September 2012 02:32, David Conrad <drc at virtualized.org> wrote:
<snip>
> My personal view: as opposed to the ccTLDs, ICANN is in a contractual relationship with gTLD providers and thus bears some responsibility to ensure the actions of those providers are in keeping with expected behavior.  Because the behavior of dotless domains (like wildcards in TLDs) has unexpected/undesirable consequences, I believe it is appropriate for ICANN, as a party to allowing those TLDs to be created, to limit those behaviors.  This is not to say I think they should be forever outlawed, rather I believe the parties that introduce them should be required to go through existing processes (ones created after the SiteFinder situation) to ensure there is foreknowledge of potential weirdness.

+1

I think "oh no ban them" is too extreme of a reaction, but the reverse
of "well allow them" has too many potential issues, perhaps the
initial default agreement should forbid them with a process in place
where a TLD wishing to use them can apply for permission on a
case-by-case basis? I expect A/AAAA records for barcelona would
probably be more of an issue than for capitalone. (meaning that the
ones most likely to want to use their TLDs in this way are also the
ones most likely to cause issues)

ccTLDs are a completely different topic, as they are under national
"jurisdiction" rather than being ICANNs, and I don't think ICANN
should have any opinion over the use of those beyond delegating to the
servers chosen by the generally recognised government of said country.
The issues of A/AAAA records are also less of a concern here as I
don't think many people put 2 character names in to the same category
as longer ones.

- Mike