search

wkumari / draft-wkumari-dnsop-internal

Draft requesting the allocation and delegation of .internal for RFC1918 type use.
11 stars 4 forks source link

Status #6

Open sandstrom opened 6 years ago

sandstrom commented 6 years ago

@wkumari Great initiative! 🥇

Just curious, what's the status of this RFC? What has the response from IETF been?

@jeffbarr @jeffbarg sorry for the ping 😄

In short, this RFC suggests making .internal a protected TLD, for internal use.

Since AWS EC2 is heavily invested in .internal I'm curious if you could inquiry with colleagues of yours internally, to see if there is interest in supporting this? Perhaps someone in your Route53 or EC2 team? Or someone with good connections to ICANN et. al.

wkumari commented 6 years ago

The response from the IETF was, basically, "No, we don't want to do this work here, take it to ICANN instead. The minutes are at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-100-dnsop/

I'm also involved in ICANN (I serve on the Stability and Security Advisory Committee), and, once I have some time, will see if I can progress it within the ICANN world.

wkumari commented 6 years ago

Whoops, didn't intend to close the issue, reopening it...

sandstrom commented 6 years ago

@wkumari Thanks for the update!

.internal would be very useful to a lot of people! I hope you'll get something going at ICANN.

Somewhat related: A blessed local development TLD would also be useful. Instead of having every company buy their own global TLD for internal use, like Google did, it would be nice if there would be a reserved keyword for it. .dev would have been ideal, but the english vocabulary is large, I'm sure there are other words that would be a good fit.

jacobbednarz commented 4 years ago

@wkumari apologies in advance for flogging an old horse but did this ever get traction with ICANN? If so, is there a better place to follow it's status?