Hi Ed,

Referring to: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2005-2.html

A few thoughts on the restrictions on this:

"gTLD" usually means "generic Top Level Domain". There are also "sTLD" - sponsored TLD. (Check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GTLD, at the bottom of the page there's a box that breaks gTLDs into sTLDs and other categories.)

Sometimes "interesting" zones are not the TLD but one under the TLD. E.g., .co.tld. or .com.tld. I think that these should be eligible.

if you look at the history if the discussion you will find that the scope of the policy scaled down from any domain that may feel the need to deploy anycasting down to gTLDs and ccTLDs. That limitation is the consensus of the discussion process wether teh community will accept the address swamp space and routing entries. I have seen massive resistance against to put sTLDs and/or other "important" domains in the scope of that policy. I would like to stop this discussion at this phase as I have not seen new arguments. I believe that with an increasing acceptance of new TLDs and experience with this policy we may see a policy change to include sTLDs in some future. ccTLDs and gTLDs that organize themselves on the SLD level are in scope of the policy. However all TLDs get the same resources assigned. Currently it will not be possible to get multiple assignments for the same TLD. Regards Andreas Baess