[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [ga] New Domain Name Solution
With no offense, this is an old idea. I had this idea in Kuala Lumpur at
the INET conference in 1997, and when I recounted it with delight and pride
to some assembled wise heads, they all looked at me sadly and said in
chorus - "Won't work for email."
And so it won't, and that's one reason it won't work.
Besides, for disney.com, who comes up first on this list (supposing that
Disney would go along with this scheme for a nanosecond)? Would it be
Disney of Mickey fame, or Disney Bedpans, Inc. from Cleveland?
Any answer you give to that will have someone deciding on priority and
deciding also on rights, and then we're back to square one.
+From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of Jason
+Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 1999 2:34 PM
+Subject: [ga] New Domain Name Solution
+I apologize in advance because I know this is not the
+correct forum for my suggestion but I was hoping someone
+could give me advice on someones e-mail or a list that
+would be more appropriate.
+I have thought of a new, perhaps novel, solution to the
+domain name conflict issue that eliminates the need to add
+any additional top-level domains. The solution is to allow
+_multiple_ entities to register the _same_ domain name.
+The domain name service would return not just one but
+multiple IP addresses for the domain. Each site would have
+an additional file in the root directory called desc.txt
+that would contain a short (500 character) description of
+the site. This is similar to the robot.txt file that many
+sites have now. The client program would request these
+files whenever multiple IP addresses are returned from the
+domain name service. The client program would display the
+desc.txt files one after another with a link to select the
+one the user desires. For requests at other than the root,
+the client program would see if both sites contain that
+directory or file and go directly to that site if it is
+unique otherwise would display the same "choice" screen.
+This approach has some advantages:
+ It is bottom up - similar to the ethics of the internet,
+their is no central control and instead the users and the
+site owners are empowered.
+ It fits the physical world model - the fact that multiple
+organizations use the same name does not cause problems in
+the physical world because only one of them is really what
+people are looking for and when confused the people get
+information and they make the decision.
+ It avoids conflict - disputes are eliminated since as
+many people who want a specific domain name can use it.
+The approach has some problems:
+ New client software - current client software does not
+handle getting multiple IP addresses as a response. Given
+the revision speed of the internet this could be eliminated
+ New servers software - again software modifications are
+ New conflicts - sites that are imitation sites could try
+to fool people into choosing a them instead of their well
+known competitor. This sounds like an appropriate venue
+for trademark disputes and libel disputes which are going
+to happen no matter what. In addition, third parties may
+get into the act by certifying competing sites and making a
+list of imitation sites. Again, the market can find the
+I think this idea has merit and I welcome any suggestions
+Again from the DNSO GA mailing list, I would appreciate
+suggestions on the more appropriate venue to forward the
+Jason Glazer, P.E.
+GARD Analytics, Inc.
+1028 Busse Highway
+Park Ridge, IL 60068
+Phone: (847) 698 - 5686 FAX: 5600