Re: Prior Use - Experimental registries

["Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>]

Speaking for myself and not the IAHC:

Simon Higgs writes:
> >
> >    It is extremely unlikely that any other TLDs [other than ISO-3166
> >    TLDs -- pm] will be created.
> >
> 
> S'funny. It doesn't say that in my copy.

It says exactly that in your copy modulo my bracketed comment.

> 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.

Yes it does. The intended interpretation is that it was unlikely that
TLDs other than ISO-3166 TLDs would be created. Thats why I did the
insertion above -- clearly marked with brackets and initials as my own
text. Your interpretation of the sentence in question would render it
meaningless, since saying "it is unlikely that TLDs other than members
of the set of ISO TLDs and members of the set of TLDs which are not
ISO TLDs will be created" is utterly empty of content. Unfortunately
the sentence was syntactically ambiguous, but it was not placed there
for decoration, and the intent is obvious to anyone familiar with the
situation.

I also noted...

> > I'm sure other interpretations of the line in question are possible --
> > my insertion there could be disputed by some particularly partisan
> > individual -- but this is the only interpretation that is is at all
> > consistant with what almost the entire community knew at the
> > time.

I stand by that statement.

Anyway, you say this:

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

It is my opinion, based on what I consider to have been obvious and
pervasive community understanding, based on my own extensive memory of
the history of the DNS from its inception to the present (all of which
I personally observed), and on the basis of extensive available
textual evidence, that for many years ISO 3166 TLDs have been
processed, but that there was no expectation that any other top level
domains were to be created, perhaps ever, and there was no requirement
on the part of the IANA to process any requests for other TLDs in any
way whatsoever, nor any expectation that they would do so. In the last
two years, the notion of creating new iTLDs has gained strength, and
it is very possible, perhaps even likely, that will happen. However,
that was not the historical situation, especially not when the RFC was
drafted.

Permit me to be very, very blunt. It is further my opinion that this
is not even a borderline question of interpretation but in fact a
matter of obvious historical record. Your position is about as tenable
as a revisionist claim that firearms were not used in the Vietnam
War. Many things may be in dispute, but this isn't one of them. I
would have dismissed the comment out of hand were you not so insistant
on forwarding this utterly specious claim.


Perry
PS Again, speaking for myself and not for the IAHC.