Re: Prior Use - Experimental registries

[Stephen Harris <sweh@mpn.com>]

In a recent message, Simon Higgs said:
> S'funny. It doesn't say that in my copy. It says:
> 
> 2.  The Top Level Structure of the Domain Names
> 
>    In the Domain Name System (DNS) naming of computers there is a
>    hierarchy of names.  The root of system is unnamed.  There are a set
>    of what are called "top-level domain names" (TLDs).  These are the
>    generic TLDs (EDU, COM, NET, ORG, GOV, MIL, and INT), and the two
>    letter country codes from ISO-3166.  It is extremely unlikely that
>    any other TLDs will be created.
> 
> It DOES NOT single out ISO-3166 TLDs at all.

Well, I read a consequence into that paragraph.  If the ISO-3166 codes
change (eg new ones get added) then the National TLD's that refer to it
should change as well, to match (otherwise we end up with codes not in
either of the two sets, or an incomplete set).  So there _is_ an
implicit route for new ISO-3166 based TLDs hiding in here.

>    While all requests for new top-level domains must be sent to the
>          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>    Internic (at hostmaster@internic.net), the regional registries are

This doesn't imply that new requests will be acted upon, it just gives you
an address to write to.  Internic passing to IANA and IANA saying "we've
got it but we don't know what to do with it yet" is perfectly valid response.
It may not be "acceptable" to people wanting to make a business out of
this, but it's valid.

>       This means that the same rules are applied to all requests, all
>       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>       requests must be processed in a non-discriminatory fashion, and
>                                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I see no discrimination thus far.  All requests have just been piled up
and stored.

>       There are no requirements on subdomains of top-level domains
>       beyond the requirements on higher-level domains themselves.  That
>       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>       is, the requirements in this memo are applied recursively.  In
>               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Irrelevant for TLD discussion.  This section is for subdomains

> Now is it getting any clearer? There is an existing procedure... repeat
> after me...

There is a procedure for making a request, but there is no procedure for
receiving this requirest nor for acting upon this request.

Indeed, "All requests made before 1997/01/01 are refused" follows the above
quite happily - it's a judgement based in a non-discriminatory fashion.
It may not been a _good_ judgement, but (again) it's a valid one.

rgds
Stephen