- Test - lists.nanog.org

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

NANOG Meeting Info
by Pam Ciesla 27 Jul '95

27 Jul '95

NANOG Meeting September 11 & 12, 1995, Pittsburgh, PA Hotel: Holiday Inn (rooms blocked until 8/25) $78.00 + 12% tax At University Ctr. 100 Lytton Ave. Pittsburgh, PA 15213 412-682-6200 phone Please mention NANOG when you make reservations. Airport: Pittsburgh International Airport Meeting Location: Pittsburgh Supercomputing Ctr. in the Mellon Institute Bldg. 4400 Fifth Ave. Pittsburgh, PA 15213 412-268-4960 main number More info to follow later. Pam Ciesla

1 0

Re: US Domain -- County Delegations
by Phil Dykstra 27 Jul '95

27 Jul '95

Least we keep repeating "25,000,000 mid-to-large-sized businesses in the United States", which as someone pointed out would be ~10 persons per business, I offer some counter numbers. Over 95% of all corporate wealth/capitalization in the United States is contained in the largest 5000 businesses. A good deal of that is contained in the top 500. I believe that it is in everyone's interest, and not a technological burden, to support these few thousand companies in a top level .com domain. Just because there may be millions of tiny home businesses does not mean that e.g. IBM should end up several levels deep in the tree. Look at the number of people that will access IBM vs. my home business. Think of having to traverse potentially backwater DNS servers to access multi-billion dollar companies? Of course deciding who's in or out is where the difficulty lies, but the technology doesn't demand uniform inconvenience for us all. - Phil

1 0

Re: US Domain -- County Delegations
by nordlund＠databank.com 27 Jul '95

27 Jul '95

>It appears to me that we are making some rather weird assumptions here, >based on history in other environments (like current domain names, phone >numbers, USMail addresses, and so). It is not so clear to me that there will >always be a one-to-one mapping between the destination one wants to reach, >and some name like vixie.sf.ca.us. Eventually such strict bindings will hurt >us even more than they do today. What do you really want? Well, I want to >email Joe Smith? No way, there are too many of those, give me more >information? So, eventually may be we have to deal with more levels of >indirection and some data base support that allows us to zoom in, and, like >it or not, perhaps introduce some margin of error ("sorry, wrong number, >find another Vixie") Hmmm. Like X.400/500?? state=XX, country=US, surname=Jones, Givenname=Pete city=YY, neighborhood=sunnyside, street=rockfence etc. etc. > >I think in our discussions we have ways too much a historical Internet >perspective >with strict bindings in mind, and names and addresses that are supposed to >last for lfetimes. This will not work. Ther are too many people, too many >companies, too many mapping strategies out there. Whether I email to "Vixie, >the bind dude," or "Vixie, the networking person living in Northern >California," may be there should be algorithms and facilities in place that >map those to the same person. Perhaps even in ways the information (such as >email) follows him, rather than him having to chase after his email (e.g., >remap his "current" location when/after he moves). > >What names or addresses things eventually map to should be fairly irrelevant >in terms of perceived complexity, as you'd alias Joe Smith@whereever to some >short version in your personal alias/nickname file anyway. Or is that just >mapping information for a data base supported translation server? > Dave Nordlund Dir of Technical Svcs Databank, Inc 913/842-6699 1473 Hwy 40 nordlund(a)databank.com Lawrence, KS 66044 "Your Key to the Internet

1 0

Re: US Domain -- County Delegations
by nordlund＠databank.com 27 Jul '95

27 Jul '95

>On Wed, 26 Jul 1995, Paul A Vixie wrote: > >> >Or, even better, for major metropolitan areas like SF, LA, NYC, >> >CHI etc the name central city can be used instead of state. >> >> I like this idea. (Note that VIXIE.SF.CA.US has moved many times since its >> creation, and though I've always been in the Bay Area I've not lived in San >> Francisco since 1988.) > >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. > >VIXIE.BIND.HACKER ? > >Michael Dillon Voice: +1-604-546-8022 >Memra Software Inc. Fax: +1-604-542-4130 >http://www.memra.com E-mail: michael(a)memra.com > How much do we want to use the .US domain? For heavy use, we need a style for organizations that are beyond cities, countys or even states. I support a style that will be organization.US or maybe organization.COM.US (of all things). Dave Nordlund Dir of Technical Svcs Databank, Inc 913/842-6699 1473 Hwy 40 nordlund(a)databank.com Lawrence, KS 66044 "Your Key to the Internet"

1 0