[CCWG-ACCT] latest letter from Cruz et al FYI
Nigel Roberts
nigel at channelisles.net
Mon May 23 11:52:44 UTC 2016
I don't need examples. I know examples exist.
Indeed, the fact that the RFCs have fallen into desuetude in respect of
.COM is the best example.
I was specifically referring to intentional language in RFC 1591 and
possibly earlier RFCs that established the Domain Name System.
I suggest that to the main extent, any hypothetical proprietary rights
creation would have occurred then, not now.
On 23/05/16 12:46, Arasteh wrote:
> O
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On 23 May 2016, at 12:28, Andrew Sullivan <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:
>>
>> Many of the policies governing the root zone from the rfcs do _not_ apply throughout the tree. I feel on pretty confident ground about this. If you need examples I will provide when I'm at a real machine, but as a general matter it is dangerous to reason from "policy in ." to "policy for all domains." The protocol is different.
>>
>> A
>>
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community
mailing list