[2626] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NAVYJOBS.COM
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (edfang@visi.net)
Tue Apr 23 01:06:42 1996
From: edfang@visi.net
To: avg@postman.ncube.com (Vadim Antonov)
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 23:06:24 +0000
CC: nanog@merit.edu
Why limit to companies with 200+ hosts. You open yourself to much
more trouble (read legal) if this was the case. If you just said
everybody had to take a domain under your balanced tree aa.com ab.com
ac.com etc then you could project some sort of fairness to the whole
idea. Nobody could really complain about getting unfair treatment,
there are no openings for discussion. Names would be delegated in
the slots that had openings.
I don't think you could get this to fly with the current nameholders,
but an interesting concept nonetheless.
Ed
> Why not to restrict first-level domains to companies
> which can demonstrate that they have 1000+ hosts?
> Companies with 200+ hosts then should use .A.COM -- .Z.COM
> (i know, some of them are taken, but that can be fixed).
> Smaller companies should use .xx.COM (and xx is NOT choosen
> by the companies -- it is just the random seed and/or
> registry ID).
>
<snip>
> That kind of defeats the "menmonic" value of names but
> still beats telephone numbers (and then, what kind of
> mnemonic can be used to distinguish between thousands of
> nearly identical small businesses?)
>
> --vadim
>
