North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: MEDIA: ICANN rejects .xxx domain

  • From: Fred Baker
  • Date: Fri May 12 01:17:43 2006
  • Authentication-results: sj-dkim-7.cisco.com; [email protected]; dkim=pass (sig from cisco.com verified; );
  • Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; l=265; t=1147411044; x=1148275044;c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim7001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version;d=cisco.com; [email protected]; z=From:Fred=20Baker=20<[email protected]>|Subject:Re=3A=20MEDIA=3A=20ICANN=20rejects=20.xxx=20domain;X=v=3Dcisco.com=3B=20h=3D4pWAeKxf8zlX5anJ5JLLNXi+WZ8=3D; b=iPoTcgYBEIWgT0X9HdsaDDo5EHGiKhTMALzMqeVqRFlYZ9oP2F9aUc3GZk9sKgvwladVRZOnMJ/HEOIG0jFkJw+ZI1YsuJnfILGbo9Rlpyj1P43FWex03MO8e0j1BjuN;
On May 11, 2006, at 8:42 PM, Jim Popovitch wrote:


Why not just plain ole hostnames like nanog, www.nanog, mail.nanog
For the same reason DNS was created in the first place. You will recall that we actually HAD a hostname file that we traded around...