In message <9507281742.AA12717@gw.home.vix.com>, Jerry Scharf writes:
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 00:51:03 -0400 From: Curtis Villamizar <curtis@ans.net>
Is ibm.nyse.com, dec.nyse, mci.nasdaq.com a problem? This takes the arbitrary decision out of accepting or denying someone access to the .com hierarchy and enforces and already strict naming.
There are two problems I see with this. There are many companies who are privately held, including billion dollar ones. Also, there are companies who have certificates traded on more than one trading place (I know of Japan/US situations.)
Privately held companies will have to go in the geographic heirarchy. I don't think this is a major hardship. It's OK to have two domain names if trading on more than one exchange.
The more fundamental question is where do you put all the companies that you are now forcing out of .com?
Put them in the geographic heirarchy.
Jerry
Of course the $25k a year to stay in .com might also be an option for the truly huge and certainly fund some hefty root name servers. Curtis