On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 09:10:09AM -0500, Steven M. Bellovin mailed:
> In my area of NJ, virtually every town's "obvious" .com domain names were
> grabbed by one of two competing would-be service providers. They had
> absolutely no town-specific content -- but if the town wanted a Web
> site, they had no choice but to deal with these folks. I have no major
> problem with first-come, first-served *productive* use of a domain name,
> but frankly, that's not where the problem has been. The problem has
> been speculators and cybersquatters.
Uh, why couldn't the town just use <name>.nj.us or whatever the city specific
code was long ago and far way.
No. However, they could use ci.<name>.nj.us, and that's where I usually go
if I'm looking for a particular city's web site.
The reason for this distinction is to support things like:
ci.alameda.ca.us City of Alameda
co.alameda.ca.us County of Alameda
joesshoes.alameda.ca.us Joe's Shoe Shop in Alameda, CA
etc. There's an RFC that spells all this out (1680 comes to mind, but not
sure that's the right number).
> On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 09:10:09AM -0500, Steven M. Bellovin mailed:
> > In my area of NJ, virtually every town's "obvious" .com domain names were
> > grabbed by one of two competing would-be service providers. They had
> > absolutely no town-specific content -- but if the town wanted a Web
> > site, they had no choice but to deal with these folks. I have no major
[snip]
> Uh, why couldn't the town just use <name>.nj.us or whatever the city specific
> code was long ago and far way.
No. However, they could use ci.<name>.nj.us, and that's where I usually go
if I'm looking for a particular city's web site.
The reason for this distinction is to support things like:
ci.alameda.ca.us City of Alameda
co.alameda.ca.us County of Alameda
joesshoes.alameda.ca.us Joe's Shoe Shop in Alameda, CA
etc. There's an RFC that spells all this out (1680 comes to mind, but not
sure that's the right number).
...right. And Delegation of nameservice is a CUSTODIALSHIP for the end
user organization/entity. The pain in .US was felt when some 3rd-level
delegates took on a custodianship for free and then charged folks
underneath them, a form of delegation-squatting, with no intent of
sheparding the resource until clue was imparted to the more-appropriate
organizations. That's just wrong, and triggered involvement of legal
entities again.
And it is RFC1480. The major mistake was that good will and desire to
get folks to Do It Right would remain the prime motivator.