[164421] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: On topic of domains
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Guillaume Parent)
Thu Jul 11 16:31:18 2013
In-Reply-To: <krmkg2$flc$1@ger.gmane.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 12:42:50 -0400
From: Guillaume Parent <gparent@gparent.org>
To: Chris Hills <chaz@chaz6.com>, nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Most of us would have no problem doing it, but the majority of users don't
even understand why there's dots in the first place let any why they'd need
to put one for nyc but not for facebook.com
-gp
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Chris Hills <chaz@chaz6.com> wrote:
> On 11/07/2013 15:27, Jon Mitchell wrote:
> >
> > After .nyc thread, thought this IAB announcement may be of interest.
> >
> >
> http://www.iab.org/documents/correspondence-reports-documents/2013-2/iab-statement-dotless-domains-considered-harmful/
> >
> > -Jon
> >
>
> Whilst I am not a fan of dotless domains, as long as one uses the fully
> qualified domain name (e.g. http://ac./), there should not be any
> trouble using it in any sane software. It seems that most people aren't
> aware these days that a fqdn includes the trailing period (by definition).
>
>
>
