Re: [ga] Domain names as observed (was Tucows Response to CochettiTransfer Letter)
Jeff Williams wrote:
> Joanna and all assembly members,
> Joanna Lane wrote:
> > on 7/27/01 1:18 PM, Sotiris Sotiropoulos at firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> > > I think this ought to be added to the thread "Domain Names as Observed"
> > > (perhaps Joanna, you could add it to the list already at
> > internetstakeholders.com?)
> > Done. The current list is:-
> > A Domain Name is neither dial tone nor a telephone number. IP connectivity
> > is the closest analog to dial tone. An IP address is the closest analog to
> > the phone number, which the DNS was designed to mask for the benefit of the
> > end-user. (Ross Wm. Rader)
> > Domain Names are a Public Resource.
> > Domain Names are Private Property.
> You have a problem here with these two "Definitions?". A Domain Name
> cannot be both a Public Resource and Private property. I think you mean
> that the DNS is a Public Resource and Domain Names are Private Property?
I have to admit that these two "definitions" did appear rather contradictory to me
as well. I think you're quite correct here Jeff.
> > Domain Names are currently subject to lease contracts with registrars.
> > Domain Names are a mnemonic aid for web site location.
> > Domain Names can be a mnemonic aid for an IP address.
> This is also technically incorrect as well. And IP address is a translator
> for a TLD or potentially a Domain Name.
This is a more subtle but equally important distinction. The "content" of an IP
address is informed by the registered Domain Name and its holder. I think this is
a crucial point to stress. Nice heads-up Jeff.
This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html