Re: pseudo-TLDs

[Frank Ellermann <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Charles Lindsey wrote:

> Unfortunately, ICANN never signed up to RFC 2606

How's "verisign up" supposed to work in the case of ICANN ?

I'd guess that there was an "IETF last call" for this BCP,
and if they didn't like it their objection didn't make it
into the final text or into a published appeal.

But actually I think they have no problems with RfC 2606,
IANA hosted the (dummy) <http://example.org> etc. pages
for the three example SLDs defined in RfC 2606 chapter 3.

A Google search "2606 site:icann.org" resulted in 25 hits,
some indicate that ICANN does know and support this BCP,
e.g. <http://www.icann.org/tlds/tld-criteria-15aug00.htm>

> the claim within the RFC that IANA had signed up to it
> appears not (or no longer) to be true if you search the
> IANA site.

For the reserved TLDs it's a semantical problem, they
don't "exist", they are forever reserved.  Probably the
Web master is no Escher-fan, otherwise (s)he could list
"TLD example" and the other three as "this is no TLD" ;-)

                      Bye, Frank