nanog mailing list archives
Re: Were A record domain names ever limited to 23 characters?
From: Jay Ashworth <jra () baylink com>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 22:30:52 -0400 (EDT)
----- Original Message -----
From: "steve pirk [egrep]" <steve () pirk com>
What was so funny was that someone got Internic/Network Solutions to up the limit. Apparently just to save some money on reprinting movie posters... ok, so they would have had to change some trailers... ;-]
"3com.com" Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra () baylink com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
Current thread:
- Re: Were A record domain names ever limited to 23 characters? Lamar Owen (Oct 07)
- Re: Were A record domain names ever limited to 23 characters? steve pirk [egrep] (Oct 07)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Were A record domain names ever limited to 23 characters? Jimmy Hess (Oct 07)
- Re: Were A record domain names ever limited to 23 characters? steve pirk [egrep] (Oct 07)
- Re: Were A record domain names ever limited to 23 characters? Owen DeLong (Oct 07)
- Re: Were A record domain names ever limited to 23 characters? bmanning (Oct 10)
- Message not available
- Re: Were A record domain names ever limited to 23 characters? steve pirk [egrep] (Oct 11)
- Re: Were A record domain names ever limited to 23 characters? steve pirk [egrep] (Oct 07)
- Re: Were A record domain names ever limited to 23 characters? Jay Ashworth (Oct 07)
- Re: Were A record domain names ever limited to 23 characters? Joe Hamelin (Oct 07)
- Re: Were A record domain names ever limited to 23 characters? Jay Ashworth (Oct 07)
- Re: Were A record domain names ever limited to 23 characters? Owen DeLong (Oct 07)
- Re: Were A record domain names ever limited to 23 characters? Joe Hamelin (Oct 07)
- Re: Were A record domain names ever limited to 23 characters? JC Dill (Oct 10)