[6830] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Domain names for ISP infrastructure links
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Philip J. Nesser II)
Tue Jan 7 19:49:16 1997
From: "Philip J. Nesser II" <pjnesser@martigny.ai.mit.edu>
To: jcurran@bbnplanet.com (John Curran)
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 19:47:10 -0500 (EST)
Cc: jstewart@metro.isi.edu, nanog@merit.net
In-Reply-To: <v02140b26aef89a1d84ea@[192.52.71.233]> from "John Curran" at Jan 7, 97 07:35:16 pm
John Curran supposedly said:
>
> At 17:25 1/7/97, John W. Stewart III wrote:
> >conventions are fine
> >
> >and it's helpful to users and operators alike for names to
> >contain a fair amount of information
> >
> >but "standardizing" with fixed-width fields, pop codes,
> >next-hop router, etc. doesn't seem that productive when
> >providers are gonna do what they want anyway.
>
> No... we're going to mandate OID-style router names
> for the world's Internet providers:
>
> <isoc-tree>.<internet-infrastructure branch>.
> <iso country code>.<city ordinal>.<provider #>.
> <facility #>.<rack #>.<shelf #>.<router ordinal>
>
> Great fun to watch (it could be happening this way
> in the alternate universe next door.)
>
> ;-)
> /John
>
>
>
Which is exactly why I asked the question if people are serious about
this. I have great fun specifying things (hey thats why I like the IETF
:-) and would happily spend a few hours coming up with all sorts of great
specifications but I want to know if they have any chance of being adopted.
---> Phil
