Re: Thread 5: Defining the namespace

["Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>]

Simon Higgs writes:
> At 12:10 PM -0500 12/26/96, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> 
> > Simon Higgs writes:
> > > Mmmmm... The equation is broken. The only one that stands out as valid
> > > is .HOME. The problem with the other examples is that they fail to
> > > divide the name space in a meaningful way.
> >
> > That wasn't one of the criteria listed in the document.
> 
> Forgive me for being blunt.
> 
> If the committee can't divide up the name space in a meaningful way,
> they have fucked up their number one goal, which is the consistent
> administration of the name space.

Consistent administration isn't a goal, actually. Making sure the
system as a whole works well for its users is a goal, but as just one
example .INT is administered very differently from the way any of the
new TLDs will be, which is reasonable.

As for whether the new domain names are meaningfully different from
each other or from existing ones, that was not a listed goal. It might
be reasonable, it might not, but the stated notion was to set up new
fairly "generic" top level domains, not application specific ones.

Perry
Speaking for myself, and not for the IAHC in an official capacity.