nanog mailing list archives

Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs


From: Mark Andrews <marka () isc org>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:25:54 +1000


In message <alpine.BSF.2.00.1106200055140.23147 () joyce lan>, "John R. Levine" wr
ites:
And your technical solution to ensure "http://apple/"; always resolves
to "apple." and doesn't break people using "http://apple/"; to reach
"http://apple.example.net/"; is?

Whatever people have been doing for the past decade to deal with 
http://dk/ and http://bi/.

As I think I said in fairly easy to understand language, this is not a new 
problem. I am not thrilled about lots of new TLDs, but it is silly to 
claim that they present any new technical problems.

There is a big difference between a handful of tld breaking the
rules, by making simple hostnames resolve to addresses in the DNS,
and thousands of companies wanting the rules re-written because
they have purchased "<tm>." and want to be able to use "user@tm"
reliably.

Simple host names, as global identifiers, where phase out in the
1980's for good reasons.  Those reasons are still relevant.

Mark

Regards,
John Levine, johnl () iecc com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies
",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka () isc org


Current thread: