Hi,

Thanks for your comments.

I was specifically thinking of 6.2.3

> The following questions should be discussed by the IETF:
>
>       Is there a need to reserve any name, as long as it is unique, or
>       is there any technical reason to reserve a particular name?
>
>       Are non-technical reasons to reserve a "specific" name acceptable?
>
>       Is demonstrated prior-usage of a specific name a valid rationale?
>
>    When processing gTLD applications, ICANN has a process to review
>    those to check if the proposed names are potentially offensive to
>    certain communities, have political ramifications, etc.. It is worth
>    asking if the IETF should have a similar process in place to evaluate
>    specific proposed reserved names, and, if so, how such process would
>    be implemented, and how appeals should be handled?

I know that NCSG is primarily focused on domain names at ICANN, but
wondered whether the statement above was something external to ICANN but
related to domain names that we might have a comment on.

Personally I do, and as an IETF participant do plan to get involved in. 
So figured it would be good to check and see what this group thought
about it.

But if Sam's view is the prevalent one, that is ok to.

avri


On 05-Nov-15 01:39, Sam Lanfranco wrote:
>
> Avri has raised the question of whether or not NCSG should be
> concerned with the names and resolving protocols questions raised in
> the following IETF document:
>
> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem-00.txt
>
> Having read the document here is my small contribution. There may be
> some issues in the questions raised that might become of interest to
> NCSG but given the nature of the issue – reserve names linked to other
> (non-DNS) resolution protocols- my advice is to leave it up to the
> IETF to ruminate over the issues and, at the appropriate times, that
> may toss up issues for NCSG to consider. It does not look like an area
> where NCSG mining documents for NCSG-centric issues would be productive.
>
> Sam L. (NPOC)
>
> /
> //
> /
> /On 2015-11-04 4:50 PM, Avri Doria wrote://
> /
>> /https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem-00.txt//i
>> know the council is not interested in such things, but thought maybe
>> the NCSG is. avri/
>


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus