On 7 mar 2009, at 16.25, David Conrad wrote:
On Mar 7, 2009, at 1:07 AM, Patrik Fältström wrote:I think it is time to not have a general rule "lets add something if not proven that adding will create harm", but instead "lets add something only if proven that it absolutely not does create any harm", and then have the people that want certain dangerous characters in there explain why it is safe.Define "harm".
I want it the other way around. I want someone to define "no harm".Examples might be things like inability for the owners of 2nd level domains to enter the domain name they registered in browsers, problems to use the domain name (including the TLD) in text, or whatever. I.e. it to some degree have to do with what policy you have for registrations in the 2nd level domain (for rendering purposes for example).
On top of this, I would like to have a situation where if someone complains after you got your domain, it is your fault, not a problem for an evaluation/assignment committee that did some evaluation (or not).
If you want a TLD, you tell me that you will not create any harm. You do, you get the domain, things go poof, then you did not do your homework beforehand.
Patrik
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
