.NP

[gitmatt19]

Looking at .np it appears they have expanded considerably. I pinged them but since they appear to have a website that defines all of the suffixes so one of the masters here might want to just do it ?

https://register.com.np/np-ccTLDs

thanks

[weppos]

Thanks for the update and the link.

Out of curiosity, we currently use a *.np rule that should cover all the entries in that list. Do you have a specific issue with that rule?

[gitmatt19]

Would * mean that any blahblah.np would be a valid suffix ? I am trying validate base domains seen in spam and phish site so I need to know the official list of 2nd level domains IE that SSS.gov.np has a suffix of gov.np and blahblah.np is a domain not a suffix. thanks Matt

…

On Thu, 27 Dec 2018, Simone Carletti wrote: Thanks for the update and the link. Out of curiosity, we currently use a *.np rule that should cover all the entries in that list. Do you have a specific issue with that rule? — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.[AQe62ijMXyhXYKZbau3btqSS2-I0Bx7nks5u9PGIgaJpZM4ZiH6c.gif]

[weppos]

* represents a label. Hence, since we have *.np, any <text>.np is a public suffix. So yes, blahblah.np is per that rule a public suffix.

Please note that the PSL does not validate the suffix. So it can't answer the question whether blahblah.np is a valid suffix, also because valid is a broad definition and we should first agree on what valid means. Does it mean it's formally valid? Does it mean it's an official registrar suffix? Etc etc.

So for the original purpose of the PSL, having *.np or the enumeration of all public suffixes in the list should be essentially equivalent.

[gitmatt19]

By valid I mean generally recognised or accepted as being a second or lower level domain. So since the .np registrar offers a list 2nd level domains to register I would say those are accepted 2nd level domains. Just I need to to tell the difference between blahsss.uk being a domains and co.uk being a 2nd level domain suffix. thanks Matt

…

On Thu, 27 Dec 2018, Simone Carletti wrote: * represents a label. Hence, since we have *.np, any <text>.np is a public suffix. So yes, blahblah.np is per that rule a public suffix. Please note that the PSL does not validate the suffix. So it can't answer the question whether blahblah.np is a valid suffix, also because valid is a broad definition and we should first agree on what valid means. Does it mean it's formally valid? Does it mean it's an official registrar suffix? Etc etc. So for the original purpose of the PSL, having *.np or the enumeration of all public suffixes in the list should be essentially equivalent. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.[AQe62uWswGaqBa3kCbexGaTpCAS39nujks5u9QKYgaJpZM4ZiH6c.gif]

[weppos]

Just I need to to tell the difference between blahsss.uk being a domains and
co.uk being a 2nd level domain suffix.

What if tomorrow some entity submits blahsss.uk as private public suffix? 😉

I think the PSL is not the appropriate source for what you are trying to achieve as it doesn't serve the purpose of validating a domain.

[gitmatt19]

What if tomorrow some entity submits blahsss.uk as private public suffix?

This is not a problem since we can filter anything past "===BEGIN PRIVATE DOMAINS===" as needed.

…

On Thu, 27 Dec 2018, Simone Carletti wrote: Just I need to to tell the difference between blahsss.uk being a domains and co.uk being a 2nd level domain suffix. What if tomorrow some entity submits blahsss.uk as private public suffix? 😉 I think the PSL is not the appropriate source for what you are trying to achieve as it doesn't serve the purpose of validating a domain. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.[AQe62tqEL9l7UYhOn3rOQkuz1cpD_i6Oks5u9QrYgaJpZM4ZiH6c.gif]

[dnsguru]

@gitmatt19 I am trying to close out this issue to determine if action is required. I want to determine if this is still something that you need answers or changes on, with a bias towards closing this issue by May 1, 2020.

I am mostly documenting the following to aid future eyes in following path of connection from the IANA to register.com.np as having some authoritative connection to the administration of the registry for .np in tracking this issue, as register.com.np appears to be different (at least a different domain name) to mos.com.np which is listed in the IANA:

1] Starting at the apex of authoritative sources, the IANA Entry for .NP (Nepal).
2] This lists the Registry Information URL for registration services: http://www.mos.com.np,
3] Under the menu "Services", there is a link to "Domain Services" under "Web Services", URL: http://www.mos.com.np/domain-registration.php,
4] There is a link on that page "Register Here" which takes the visitor to the following URL: https://register.com.np/

Based upon this "connective tissue", it does appear that the link provided originally (restated here for simplicity https://register.com.np/np-ccTLDs does hold some authority with respect to subdomain delegations that could be considered to be valid and active within Nepal's ccTLD namespace.)

@weppos identified that with respect to cookie or other handling the current record should be a sufficient placeholder.

Rather than add 145 lines to the .np section, the preference would be to leverage the existing record, as it appears that second level registrations are not allowed at this time.

If a more a PR were to be created, it seems that the dropdown for registration options listed at the register.com.np lists no option for second level registration, but does offer the following, which might be a reasonable compromise:

• .com.np
• .edu.np
• .gov.np
• .info.np
• .mil.np
• .name.np
• .net.np
• .org.np

(Note to later reviewers: https://nitc.gov.np/ appears to be the authority within the delegation for gov.np domain names, with registration form here.)

[dnsguru]

@gitmatt19 nudge

[dnsguru]

@gitmatt19 Closing
#1439