<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Jeff,<br class=""><div><br class=""></div><div>On Jun 15, 2020, at 7:43 AM, Jeff Neuman <<a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com" class="">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a>> wrote:<br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Menlo-Regular;" class="">Regardless of who is the intended beneficiary of the private name spaces, at the end of the day this will cause the ICANN world to "reserve" these labels from being delegated in the authoritative root. </span><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Menlo-Regular;" class="">So, I see this no differently than I see a brand TLD for example. Brand TLDs do not have a standard registration model and in fact some of the brand TLDs may be using their TLDs for their own private intranets.</span></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><div>AFAIK, 2-letter codes have been reserved since (before) RFC 1591 as assigned by ISO-3166/MA, not ICANN. Once ISO-3166/MA assigns the 2-letter code, it can (but does not have to be) delegated in the DNS. Since ISO-3166/MA has indicated certain codes will be user defined, they can’t be assigned. Roy/Ed’s draft is suggesting the fact that ISO-3166/MA has indicated a set of 2-letter codes be "user defined" be taken as that those domains are safe for use in a user defined (i.e., private) context.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>This seems very different to me than brand domains, which are assigned by ICANN.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Regards,</div><div>-drc</div><div><br class=""></div></div><style class="">ul[class*='mb-extra__public-links'], ul[class*='mb-note__public-links'], ul[class*='mb-task__public-links'] { display: none !important; }</style></body></html>