[142198] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: unqualified domains, was ICANN to allow commercial gTLDs
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Andrews)
Mon Jun 20 00:47:07 2011
To: "John Levine" <johnl@iecc.com>
From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
In-reply-to: Your message of "20 Jun 2011 03:35:03 GMT."
<20110620033503.20835.qmail@joyce.lan>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 14:46:10 +1000
Cc: vixie@isc.org, nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
In message <20110620033503.20835.qmail@joyce.lan>, "John Levine" writes:
> >i think he's seen RFC 1034 :-). anyway, i don't see the difference between
> >http://sony/ and http://sony./
>
> Neither do any of the browsers I use, which resolve http://bi/ as well
> as http://dk./ just fine. Whatever problem unqualified TLD names
> might present to web browsers has been around for a long time and the
> world hasn't come to an end.
>
> The problems with zillions of single-registrant TLDs are more
> social and economic than technical.
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?
Similarly for "mail user@apple".
Mark
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
