North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: oh, for goodness' sake.
> > On Wed, 8 Apr 1998, Stephen Sprunk wrote: > > > My vote's for NIC.INT. I'm still searching for the correct RFC on INT > > rules to see if that's appropriate, however. > > Personally, I feel that with the new TLD's coming online, IMHO, there's no > reason why one more couldn't be added JUST FOR stuff like RIPE and ARIN > and the internic. And the Root servers, etc. > > Maybe .NIC or .REG or .CORE or .... ? > > Set the requirements so that only those organizations providing "core" > internet services, which if break we're all screwed at least somewhat, can > get a delegation under them. Yeah, that'll last. How much trouble do you think a porn site would go to to get WWW.HARD.CORE? I thought so. Also - is "being able to download the newest version of Netscape" a core service? You don't think so (I hope), and I certainly don't think so, but Netscape may think so. Microsoft, too. I'm being kinda cynical here, but anything's possible. > > I can see one of the questions on the allocation form: > > 8) Estimate the number of messages which will be generated on the nanog > list if your existing Domain was placed in hold status. > That's a *great* idea! Perhaps we just form a "nanog-domain-approve" list, and just have an internet cabal that decides on every domain registration! Remember, the only reason most people don't like dictatorships is because they aren't in charge...:) eric