Vadim Antonov avg at
Mon Apr 22 07:45:23 UTC 1996

Why not to restrict first-level domains to companies
which can demonstrate that they have 1000+ hosts?
Companies with 200+ hosts then should use .A.COM -- .Z.COM
(i know, some of them are taken, but that can be fixed).
Smaller companies should use .xx.COM (and xx is NOT choosen
by the companies -- it is just the random seed and/or
registry ID).

What we should worry about is number of first-level
domains/number of hosts ratio.  It is the same problem
as with routing.  The solution is also the same --
aggregation, with subsequent Toxic Waste Dump (aka
legacy allocation) cleanup.

That kind of defeats the "menmonic" value of names but
still beats telephone numbers (and then, what kind of
mnemonic can be used to distinguish between thousands of
nearly identical small businesses?)


PS.  Obviously if IBM registers 100 domain names it is
     still a lot less damage than a small ISP (with 1000 dial-up
     customers) which registers a domain name for every such
     customer.  Big folks registering POISONOUS-BURGER.COM and
     SHIT-ON-TV.COM aren't really a problem.  Zillion of
     MOM-AND-POP.COMs is.

More information about the NANOG mailing list