- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

NEW POLICY ON INTERNET DOMAIN NAMES
by Roy Engehausen 28 Jul '95

28 Jul '95

Just a lurker normally but how about using product/services as a qualifer? Examples: ibm.computers.com att.telephone.com specialized.bicycles.com cisco.networks.com? Roy

2 1

Re: NEW POLICY ON INTERNET DOMAIN NAMES
by woody＠zocalo.net 28 Jul '95

28 Jul '95

markk(a)internic.net (Mark Kosters) writes: > Edu.com, the perennial favorite, is one of these domains. > However, I would not advocate that name. Perhaps example.com or > reserved.com? I'm assuming that you and Mr. Barton are discounting the possibility of using "domain.com" since it's already registered. You are, in fact, welcome to use it in examples, since all we do with it is explain to people from whom we get mail on user(a)domain.com and user(a)host.domain.com how to reconfigure their email gateways (since that's generally what's misconfigured, that or return addresses) so that they'll work. We registered it as something between a joke and a public service. Alternatively, if you'd like to maintain some sort of purity, we can relinquish the domain back to the NIC for a good cause like this, with the caveat that you'll get a lot of mail from clueless people who want to know why you've hijacked their email. :-) -Bill Woodcock ________________________________________________________________________________ bill woodcock woody(a)zocalo.net woody(a)applelink.apple.com user(a)host.domain.com

1 0

Re: NEW POLICY ON INTERNET DOMAIN NAMES
by Scott Bradner 28 Jul '95

28 Jul '95

> How about "postel.com he is past that, how about "postel.org" Scott

1 0

user interfaces
by Hans-Werner Braun 28 Jul '95

28 Jul '95

specific example, I want to be able to say to my computer "turn off my coffee machine" because I remember it is still on. The computer should leave me alone with all them mapping details, after all, that's what I pay it for. So, it knows who I am, so it can figure out what "my" relates to. It can figure out what coffee machines and their attributes are, and what "off" means. The right response to me would not be "give me a host name" or even (gasp!) "give me an IP address," but "do you mean the coffee machine at home or in your office?"

1 0

Re: NEW POLICY ON INTERNET DOMAIN NAMES
by sob＠academ.com 28 Jul '95

28 Jul '95

2 1

Re: NEW POLICY ON INTERNET DOMAIN NAMES
by salo＠msc.edu 28 Jul '95

28 Jul '95

> From: Mark Kosters <markk(a)internic.net> > Subject: Re: NEW POLICY ON INTERNET DOMAIN NAMES > To: chehoocheng(a)cuhk.hk (Che-Hoo Cheng) > Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 10:03:19 -0400 (EDT) > Cc: nanog(a)merit.edu > [...] > Here is policy that a group of our lawyers and technical staff has put > together to try to solve the legal quandary that the InterNIC is currently > involved in. If there are any suggestions for improvements, let me or > Dave Graves (daveg(a)internic.net) know. > [...] > (c) The use or registration of the Domain Name by Applicant does not interfere > with or infringe the right of any third party in any jurisdiction with respect > to trademark, service mark, tradename, company name or any other intellectual > property right; > [...] I read this to say that it may not be possible to submit a domain name application without consulting a lawyer, searching tradmark and other databases, and probably a bunch of other stuff. "of any third party in any jurisdiction"??? Worldwide??? How about adding a phrase like "to the best of our knowledge" to these sections? -tjs

1 0

NEW POLICY ON INTERNET DOMAIN NAMES
by chehoocheng＠cuhk.hk 28 Jul '95

28 Jul '95

Sorry for my ignorance. Can anyone give me more info about this? >NEW POLICY ON INTERNET ADDRESSES Should be NEW POLICY ON INTERNET DOMAIN NAMES!!? >Network Solutions Inc., the computer networking unit of Science >Applications International Corp., will no longer assign Internet addresses >on a first-come-first-served basis, if the address represents a trademarked >name of another company. If an individual owner of such an address refuses >to relinquish it, Network Solutions will suspend use of that address. In >the past, individuals have registered names such as "mcdonalds.com" without >owning the trademark to that name. (Wall Street Journal 7/27/95 B12) Thanks in advance. Che-Hoo Cheng | Email: chehoocheng(a)cuhk.hk or Data Comms and Networking Section | ch(a)csc.msmail.cuhk.hk Computer Services Center | Phone: +852 2609-8848 The Chinese University of Hong Kong | Fax: +852 2603-5001

4 5

EP.NET ???
by bmanning＠ISI.EDU 28 Jul '95

28 Jul '95

There have been a number of questions that have been fielded wrt the EP.NET domain and traceroute failures within that domain. For your edification, here is a brief note on the EP.NET domain. EP.NET operated as a service by the RA for exchange points around the globe. Any exchange point may become part of the EP.NET domain. The default assignment algorithm follows. The next level identifies the specific exchange. The next level identifies the attaching organization. So, the default for BillsBait&SushiShop (BBSS) at MAE-WEST is: bbss.mae-west.ep.net When BBSS attachs to the AADS NAP, the default name is: bbss.aads.ep.net Selection of provider specific names is encouraged. So when BBSS gets around to it, they may change the names to something like this: mae-west.bbss.org aads.bbss.org --bill

1 0

Re: US Domain -- County Delegations
by Sean Doran 28 Jul '95

28 Jul '95

>[Delaware (DE), a state in the USA] >And think of all the traffic that will cross the pond because >people forget the ".US"! E3 anyone? Sean.

2 1

Re: US Domain -- County Delegations
by Vadim Antonov 27 Jul '95

27 Jul '95

> >Or, even better, for major metropolitan areas like SF, LA, NYC, > >CHI etc the name central city can be used instead of state. Michael Dillon wrote: >This would seem to indicate that geographical domains are a bad idea and >that domain names should be based on some characteristic that is less >likely to change over time. The geographical position (modulo state/metro area) of an organization or an individual _is_ the most stable characteristic, on average. Moving long-distance is hard and few people or companies do that more than two times in their life. What i was talking about is that using state names does not provide sufficient granularity. It makes sense to use "locales" instead of historical administrative domains. I.e. a person living in Kansas City will likely to think of it as of a single city, not something between Missouri and Kansas. And, anyway, the goal is to make hierarchy deeper, without making it hard to use. <city>.<state>.us is too long to type. <state>.us is not enough; so here goes my proposal of "extended states". --vadim

1 0