[Scspamcop] Re: Faux addresses:

[Twayne]

> Tim McGraw wrote:
>> Mike Easter wrote:
>>> All in all, it would be better to use an invalid domainname than to
>>> use nobody at spamcop.net IMO notwithstanding the recommendations in
>>> the faq and elsewhere.
>>
>> Another thing that works just as well as your suggestion of
>> ".invalid" is to use YourCleverHandle at domain.tld.
>
> The theoretical advantage of 'invalid' over 'tld' is that it has been
> 'declared' that the string invalid is not now nor will it ever be a
> TLD, whereas it has never been so declared that there will never be
> any such TLD as 'tld'.  Currently there is no such TLD as tld, but
> that doesn't mean that there never will be.  There will never be an
> .invalid TLD.

Where has that been declared?

>
> Some people also choose to put some kind of illegal characters into
> the domainname so as to make it invalid without using the word
> 'invalid' which looks like...
>
> in'-vuh-lid - an infirm or sickly person
>
> ..instead of...
>
> in-val'-id - not legally or factually valid; null: an invalid license.
>
>
> There are all kinds of characters which might render an otherwise
> valid domainname 'in'-valid

Today.  But tomorrow?  And ipv8?