Public Comment is a vital part of our multistakeholder model. It provides a mechanism for stakeholders to have their opinions and recommendations formally and publicly documented. It is an opportunity for the ICANN community to effect change and improve policies and operations.
本内容仅提供以下语言版本
Submissions for this Proceeding
Proposed Top-Level Domain String for Private Use
View this Proceeding
My Submissions
Search Public Comment Submissions For This Proceeding
To search for keywords within Public Comment submissions documents or pages, type in the keyword and press Enter after each selection.
Submission Summary:
The BC appreciates the opportunity to provide the following comment regarding the Proposed Top-Level Domain String for Private Use.
The BC has reviewed SAC113: SSAC Advisory on Private-Use TLDs which recommends that the ICANN Board ensure a string is identified and reserved at the top level for private use. And specifically, that .INTERNAL be reserved to serve this purpose.
The BC notes that some o......
Submission Summary:
The Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) agrees with IANA’s determination that “.INTERNAL” meets the criteria and supports the selection of “.INTERNAL” to be reserved at the top level of the Domain Name System (DNS) for private use.
Submission Summary:
Please find attached (PDF) the ALAC Statement on the Proposed Top-Level Domain String for Private Use. Ratification information is included in this statement.
Kind Regards,
ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community
Website: atlarge.icann.org
Facebook: facebook.com/icannatlarge
Twitter: @ICANNAtLarge
Submission Summary:
I am in favour for the adoption of the .internal. string as reserved TLD for local DNS resolution, and I think that every manufacturer, network administrator or owner of network device in their right mind should as well find themselves in agreement.
Not really a problem if it's a few more characters long, the DNS search domain feature may come in handy albeit it's not always the case. The word "internal" is really suggestive a......
Submission Summary:
Amazon supports SSAC’s recommendation that the ICANN Board identify and reserve a top-level domain (“TLD”) for private use, and refrain from delegating it in the future. We also agree with IANA’s determination that “.INTERNAL” meets to criteria outlined by SSAC and should be selected for this purpose.
Amazon makes extensive use of the “.INTERNAL” TLD within our network for infrastructure that is only accessible locally. Unsurprising......
Submission Summary:
I would like to see a BCP RFC on the use of the "internal" TLD, and ICANN should not finalize availability of the TLD unless that RFC exists.
Submission Summary:
I Love Domains – United States o’ America, the operator of the .UnitedStatesoAmerica.com extension, has come forward to provide a contribution to the construction of a fair and diverse internet with ICANN.
For any questions, please send an email to:
Davies-lewis@ilovedomains.UnitedStatesoAmerica.com
I advise that the delegation of strings for private use be strictly observed and treated, as by provid......
Submission Summary:
Google endorses the use of ".internal" as a private use and reserved TLD. The string meets the primary criteria for such an internal use name and is already in use for this purpose among a number of organizations.
Submission Summary:
The IO Foundation does not believe that .internal should ever be considered under different scripts than Latin.
Submission Summary:
SSAC2024-01 is a public comment issued by the ICANN Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) supporting the IANA's determination to reserve ".INTERNAL" for private use as outlined in SAC113: the SSAC Advisory on Private-Use TLDs. The SSAC confirms that the reservation of ".INTERNAL" meets the selection criteria specified in Section 4.1 of SAC113. The document further references Appendix A of SAC113, which provides additional......
Submission Summary:
Multiple TLDs are needed to support private networks of various sizes. Please include ".lan" (local area network) and ".wan" (wide area network) in addition to ".internal" as reserved TLDs for private networks. This will provide flexibility when designing private networks and eliminate name conflicts with potential future public domain names.
Submission Summary:
I support the idea of having at least one reserved TLD for internal use, specially for usage with IPv6 addresses since they are harder to memorize.
I also agree with others that .internal is long and that having another option such as .lan would be ideal.
Submission Summary:
What strikes me most is that, to this day, the reserved, non-routable IP address ranges were associated with unresolvable .local domains.
The logic was coherent.
With your proposal, you want to provide a *public* resolution of non-routable IP addresses: this means first and foremost a leak…
An attacker wishing to enumerate targets on a non-routable network will then be able to listen to DNS traffic to gather inform......
Submission Summary:
[ Speaking as an individual only.]
As the author of a draft in the IETF which originally proposed this (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/pdf/draft-wkumari-dnsop-internal-00), and one of the primary authors of ICANN SSAC113, I fully support the IANA's proposed string.
In addition to meeting the criteria in SAC113 (as demonstrated by .internal being used in the examples) .internal is currently the hig......
Submission Summary:
.lan, .local, and .internal would all be appropriate options.
The benefit of .internal is that it is much less likely to be already currently deployed across internal network services currently. .local can be seen at the local domain level quite frequently. With that in mind, .lan is much shorter and still well understood by most.
It was mentioned in the proposal that .internal carries the implication that it is never accessible t......
Submission Summary:
An excellent suggestion to reserve a private top-level domain.
".internal" is a bit long, is a minor comment.
I don't see why you don't just reserve the sensible top 5 or 10 currently used internal TLD (which isn't a large number).
You might as well as people will probably keep using these anyway, so it's not like they can be assigned easily.
i.e. home, lan, dhcp, corp, internal, localdomain, intra
Submission Summary:
The internal root domain seems to be unsuitable due to its length - if needed to be typed manually - and (already in document) mentioned confusion with .int by users. Why was a TLD SELF, i.e. .self. not considered, as it seems to be unallocated and not a part of even unofficially used root domains (unlike the .here. domain which would have been even better, but is already allocated)?
Submission Summary:
please also reserve .lan or some other three letter TLD for private use.