nanog mailing list archives
Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs
From: Matthew Palmer <mpalmer () hezmatt org>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 12:26:20 +1000
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 02:08:18AM +0000, Paul Vixie wrote:
From: David Conrad <drc () virtualized org> Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2011 16:04:09 -1000 On Jun 19, 2011, at 3:24 PM, Paul Vixie wrote:i think we have to just discourage lookups of single-token names, universally.How?that's a good question. marka mentioned writing an RFC, but i expect that ICANN could also have an impact on this by having applicants sign something that says "i know that my single-label top level domain name will not be directly usable the way normal domain names are and i intend to use it only to register subdomain names which will work normally."
Whilst we can dream that that will work, I don't think it'll actually last very long in the face of determined marketing department pressure; also, unless that agreement also says "I agree to pay the additional costs borne by any party on the Internet that result from my failure to adhere to this agreement", it's worthless. Are your customers going to call Sony when they put http://sony/ into their web browser and it doesn't work? Hell no. They're going to call your helpdesk, and it's going to tie up a non-trivial amount of engineer time either renaming things or reconfiguring the client machine to make that URL work as the user expects it to. - Matt -- It fsck's the volume or it gets the format again. -- Don Quixote, in the Monastery
Current thread:
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs, (continued)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs David Conrad (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Mark Andrews (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs David Conrad (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Mark Andrews (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs David Conrad (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Robert Bonomi (Jun 20)
- RE: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs George Bonser (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs John Levine (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs John R. Levine (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Owen DeLong (Jun 20)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Matthew Palmer (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs David Conrad (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Joly MacFie (Jun 20)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs John Levine (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Jay Ashworth (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Mark Andrews (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs John R. Levine (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Mark Andrews (Jun 19)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Tony Finch (Jun 20)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Jay Ashworth (Jun 20)
- Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs Adam Atkinson (Jun 19)