Re: Country Code TLDs

[jp@PalmerOwns.The.Earth (John Palmer)]

> 
> postel@ISI.EDU wrote:
> > 
> > Dave Morton:
> > 
> > The country codes from ISO-3166 that are used as top-level domain names
> > are specifically the two-letter codes.
> > 
> > The three-letter codes from ISO-3166 will not be used as "official"
> > country code top-level domain names.
> > 
> > However, if somehow under the plan for new general purpose
> > international top-level domains a new three-letter iTLD of "AFG" was
> > created and the manager of that iTLD established a policy for that
> > domain limiting use to registering second level names that were somehow
> > associated with AFGHANISTAN, that would be perfectly ok.
> > 
> > --jon.
> 
> I don't think it is okay.  This creates extreme ambiguity in the
> namespace.  What about the creation of .AFG as a general purpose iTLD? 
> People could tend to associate that with Afghanistan.  Perhaps not, but
> in the case of .USA, their is little doubt it would be confused with
> .US.  
> 
> I don't believe that new iTLDs should be permitted which are
> "substantially identical"(somehow I am not sure that was the right
> word:-).
> 
> It seems to me that we will ALL be sorry, maybe not this year, or even
> this decade.  But, we will ALL be sorry someday, if we allow
> freewheeling allocation of iTLDs.  iTLDs should be for specific purposes
> with maybe a .alt(or something) to put anything else in.
> 
> The iahc should perhaps consider as they move toward new TLD's(if they
> move toward new TLDs), are you creating TLD's or registries?  Which
> drives the process.  I and others believe that the TLD creation should
> drive the process, not the registry creation.
> 
> Vince Wolodkin
> 

So much for the open process. 

I thought the IAHC was not going to impose a bunch of petty rules about
"who will confuse what with what"

I don't think that its the job of the IAHC to get involved in this 
question any more than it is their job to set technical standards
for registry database formats. 

John