nanog mailing list archives
Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain
From: Martin Hannigan <hannigan () renesys com>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 02:28:10 -0400
At 02:22 AM 5/12/2006, Jim Popovitch wrote:
Fred Baker wrote:On May 11, 2006, at 8:42 PM, Jim Popovitch wrote:For the same reason DNS was created in the first place. You will recall that we actually HAD a hostname file that we traded around...Why not just plain ole hostnames like nanog, www.nanog, mail.nanogLet's not go backwards now.... ;-)Note: I didn't advocate replacing DNS with host files. I'll attempt to clarify: If X number of DNS servers can server Y number of TLDs, why can't X number of completely re-designed DNS servers handle just root domain names without a TLD.Examples: www.microsoft smtp.microsoft www.google www.yahoo mail.yahoo Why have a TLD when for most of the world: www.cnn.CO.UK is forwarded to www.cnn.COM www.microsoft.NET is forwarded to www.microsoft.COM www.google.NET is forwarded to www.google.COM etc., etc.There are very few arguments that I've heard for even having TLDs in the first place. The most common one was "Businesses will use .COM, Networks will use .NET, Organizations and Garden Clubs will use .ORG". When in reality Businesses scoop up all the TLDs in their name/interest.
Yes, but that was when you actually wouldn't dare get a .org for yourself unless you really were qualified under the guidelines. Same for .net. The distinctions
have been meaningless for quite some time. They are simply placeholders.
Why does it matter if your routers and switches are in DNS as 123.company.NET vrs 123.routers.companyI do understand that today's DNS system was designed with TLDs in mind, and probably couldn't just switch over night. But why can't a next-gen system be put in place that puts www.microsoft and www.google right where they go now whether you use .net, .com, .org, or probably any other TLD?
Im having an offline discussion with a list member and I'll ask, why does it matter if you have a domain name if a directory can hold everything you need to know about them
via key words and ip-addrs, NAT's and all? -M< -- Martin Hannigan (c) 617-388-2663 Renesys Corporation (w) 617-395-8574 Member of Technical Staff Network Operationshannigan () renesys com
Current thread:
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain, (continued)
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain Alain Hebert (May 11)
- RE: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain Geo. (May 11)
- Message not available
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain Alain Hebert (May 11)
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain Valdis . Kletnieks (May 11)
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain william(at)elan.net (May 11)
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain Stephen Sprunk (May 11)
- RE: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain David Schwartz (May 11)
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain Jim Popovitch (May 11)
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain Fred Baker (May 11)
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain Jim Popovitch (May 11)
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain Martin Hannigan (May 11)
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain David Ulevitch (May 11)
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain Fred Baker (May 12)
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain Doug Barton (May 12)
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain Alain Hebert (May 11)
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain william(at)elan.net (May 12)
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain Michael . Dillon (May 12)
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain Steve Gibbard (May 12)
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain Jim Popovitch (May 12)
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain Todd Vierling (May 12)
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain Barry Shein (May 12)
- Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain Todd Vierling (May 12)