nanog mailing list archives
Re: network name 101100010100110.net
From: Claudio Lapidus <clapidus () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 14:57:37 -0300
Day,
does anyone see any issues with this?
Please, I strongly urge you to consider the ergonomics in question. That name is REALLY hard to read, spell, pronounce, type, recognize, etc. Agreed that there are no technical roadblocks, but again, please use common sense and choose something that doesn't make everybody's life more complicated. A domain name is something that sticks for many years and is of daily use in many many areas, and even more when it is for designating a transit ISP. my 2 cents, cl.
Current thread:
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net, (continued)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Joe Hamelin (Oct 18)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Barry Shein (Oct 18)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Tony Finch (Oct 18)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Steve Atkins (Oct 17)
- Message not available
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Roland Perry (Oct 19)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net David Shaw (Oct 19)
- RE: network name 101100010100110.net Deepak Jain (Oct 19)
- RE: network name 101100010100110.net Nathan Eisenberg (Oct 19)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net bmanning (Oct 19)
- RE: network name 101100010100110.net Tony Finch (Oct 20)
- Re: network name 101100010100110.net Roland Perry (Oct 19)