[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


To: Roy Arends <Roy.Arends@nominum.com>
cc: Olafur Gudmundsson <ogud@ogud.com>, dnssec@cafax.se, brunner@nic-naa.net
From: Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <brunner@nic-naa.net>
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 07:04:00 -0400
Delivery-Date: Fri Jun 8 16:16:15 2001
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 07 Jun 2001 18:54:51 +0200." <Pine.BSF.4.21.0106071846510.1418-100000@ws89.disi.ripe.net>
Sender: owner-dnssec@cafax.se
Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dnsext-delegation-signer-00.txt

Roy,

The two-octet space is partially occupied by iso3166 codes, at 200+ values,
and is partially occupied by aero codes, at 800+ values.

In ICANN current context, ccTLDs seek iso3166 semantics to the two-octet
SLD NAME RR label-space of gTLDs, to the discomfort of .aero gTLD.

Are all two-octet LDH-ASCII or ASCII-compatible encodings implicitly given
iso3166 semantics, or just NAME RRs?

When I saw your note that the proposed name of the record type ought not
clash with an iso3166 value, the .aero example came to my mind.

Eric

Home | Date list | Subject list