On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:15:04PM +1100, Mark Andrews <ma...@isc.org> wrote a message of 41 lines which said:
> > So, there is no ambiguity: 192.0.2.4 is always an IP address, even if > > ICANN delegates ".4". > > Except there are plenty of applications that don't do this so it is > a real problem. I do not really see what conclusion you draw from that fact. Yes, there are broken applications, I do not doubt it. There are probably apps that try to resolve a domain name without checking before that it is not an IP address, hereby violating RFC 1123. These apps will have problems if ICANN delegates .NNN where NNN is a number. But it does not imply that we should hardwire the no-digits rule in a RFC. For two reasons: 1) There are applications that violate RFC 5322 (typically email syntax checkers on Web pages, which reject many valid RFC 5322 addresses). Yet, we do not modify RFC 5322 to align it on these apps. 2) It may be a wise policy for ICANN to refuse the delegation of all-digits TLDs. But it is a policy issue, similar to registries (most TLD do so) which delegates only LDH domains (when the DNS would accept other names). There is zero technical reason to write down this limit in a RFC about the syntax. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
