Re: DNS: ADNA's first decisions - Minuted

Re: DNS: ADNA's first decisions - Minuted

From: George Michaelson <ggm§>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 16:15:20 +1000
Two eternal truths of DNS:

	short ones are better.
	all the good ones are taken.

There are contra-indications in both cases mind you, although the
norwegian who posts as maybe&#167; has a pretty fine FQDN.

The proposals for and it seems to me are going to complicate
anybodys expectations of what a 'plausible' name can be, and also
introduce the thorny problems of rogue sights like being
taken seriously by the clueless.

Since the top-level domain .COM has around 1 million entries I really can't
see why there is such a noise being made about the need for alternates
to at this time. 

It had some validity as a mechanism to achieve competition to a single DNA, but that would seem to be a vanishing problem.

If however, the policy of a is to use some external agency who can
adjudicate over Australian trademarks, and thus like the essential
costpoints become facilities managing the transferrance of ownership and
delegation as things move around, I can't say I have deep seated objections
but like any other proposal at the 2LD level:

	it doesn't need to be rushed
	it needs wide discussion
	the policy implications need to be worked out

(actually, I take that 1million .com on trust. Whats the authoritative figure
 and am I right in thinking its at least one order of magnitude bigger than NSI may be coming in for some complaint, but really in context I
 think they do a better job than many allow for. Just as M-IT do in fact.)


George Michaelson         | pty/ltd
Email: ggm&#167; |  c/o AAPT,
Phone: +61 7 3834 9976    |  level 8, the Riverside Centre,
  Fax: +61 7 3834 9908    |  123 Eagle St, Brisbane QLD 4000
Received on Fri Jun 27 1997 - 17:25:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:02 UTC