Re: Bare TLD resolutions

[David Conrad <drc () virtualized org>]

Jay,

On Sep 17, 2014, at 10:36 AM, Jay Ashworth <jra () baylink com> wrote:
> We're talking, largely, about error cases *that used to break as you wanted,
> and now might not*.

Yep.  Well, it used to break if you happened to be using the right version of resolver library.  There have been cases 
where operating system vendors had different search path behaviors in their resolver libraries depending on version and 
even patch level.  It’s all a bit of a mess.

> > There are a few ccTLDs that provide apex wildcards: they’ll return an
> > “A” record for any random goop (.WS is an example), however this
> > behavior is banned from gTLDs (an outcome of the SiteFinder debacle).
>
> A records being returned for bare TLDs *is* formally banned?
>
> (Oh: specifically for cctlds.  Got it.)

To be clear, generic TLDs (gTLDs) can’t have bare (dotless) TLDs (or wildcards). ICANN has no mechanism by which policy 
can be imposed on ccTLDs.

> Citation?

https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2013-08-30-en

Regards,
-drc

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail