North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: Namespaces (was: new.net: yet another dns namespace overlayplay)
- From: Charles Scott
- Date: Thu Mar 08 08:11:37 2001
On 8 Mar 2001, Sean Donelan wrote:
> Other than generating a lot of press, new.net's project doesn't seem to be
> anything more exciting than a bunch of AOL Keywords (another flat proprietary
And being "proprietary" where is the real market for this service? To
what extent are registrants properly informed that their "domains" do not
function for all Internet users. Sure there's information on their web
site that they may only function with some 16M users, but will they be
up-front about that as people sign up. It is interesting thought that the
registration agreement includes...
"IN ADDITION, NEW.NET MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES REGARDING ANY
MINIMUM NUMBER OF USERS WHO WILL HAVE ACCESS TO NEW.NET DOMAIN NAMES."
I can't imagine suggesting to one of my customers that they rely on a
domain that the majority of users can't resolve. So, if they can't rely on
it they'll need some other "real" domain (unless they have a specific
known target within the cooperating systems).
Also, why would someone want a domain with which there is no functional
E-Mail. Again, what customer base would be appropriate for this service?
I suppose it's possible that I somehow missed the point of all this.
Perhaps it's really not intended to be a serious service. Is it possible
that this is simply an effort to stir the TLD pot to try to get something
moving? In any case, it should be interesting the first time one of my
customers proudly informs me of his new domain and wants it implimented.