Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

internetworkers - Re: anyone planning to register .biz

internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: lonestarnot AT earthling.net
  • To: InterNetWorkers <internetworkers AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: anyone planning to register .biz
  • Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 15:59:22 -0400


> From: Greg Cox <glcox AT pobox.com>
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 12:22:41 -0400 (EDT)
>
> Considering the overall misuse (southernstatesnissan.net? Oh, what
> part of the backbone does your dealership manage?) has led to .net,
> .org, and .com being ingrained in the average joe's brain, I don't
> think it's really a problem.
>
> snip <
>
> ... we'll be back to where we started. Open as many flat namespaces
> as you like, all you'll be doing is causing a lot of people to be
> adding aliases to their http and smtp servers and paying $35/yr for
> the privilege. Flat namespaces suck. Open up .us, make people have
> to think even the slightest bit when registering/accessing a domain.


Sounds right.

I presume names are restricted now by the authority of the accredited
registrars, led by ICANN -- and that it's the good judgment of the
registrars -- assured by the accreditation process -- which keeps the
assignment reasonable for names like:

*.mil
*.state.??.us
*.ci.*.??.us
*.gov

So, how does www.totallyinappropriate.net ever get assigned?
Isn't ".net" there for a _very_ narrow, clearly defined group?

Is there something here beyond gross indifference in the registrars?


Bill




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page