nanog mailing list archives

Re: US Domain -- County Delegations


From: Curtis Villamizar <curtis () ans net>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 22:12:12 -0400


In message <9507281742.AA12717 () gw home vix com>, Jerry Scharf writes:
 Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 00:51:03 -0400
 From: Curtis Villamizar <curtis () ans net>

 Is ibm.nyse.com, dec.nyse, mci.nasdaq.com a problem?  This takes the
 arbitrary decision out of accepting or denying someone access to the
 .com hierarchy and enforces and already strict naming.

There are two problems I see with this. There are many companies who are
privately held, including billion dollar ones. Also, there are companies
who have certificates traded on more than one trading place (I know of
Japan/US situations.)

Privately held companies will have to go in the geographic heirarchy.
I don't think this is a major hardship.

It's OK to have two domain names if trading on more than one exchange.

The more fundamental question is where do you put all the companies that
you are now forcing out of .com?

Put them in the geographic heirarchy.

Jerry

Of course the $25k a year to stay in .com might also be an option for
the truly huge and certainly fund some hefty root name servers.

Curtis


Current thread: