WorldNIC

Fri Jun 12 03:14:06 UTC 1998

At 09:53 6/10/98 -0700, you wrote:
>> > .org was never meant as a domain for nonprofits; it was meant as a
>> > catchall to be used when your organization didn't fit into .com, .net,
>> > .edu or .gov.
>> 
>> Do you have a reference for that Steven?  It doesn't match what I
>> remember...
>
>The MITRE Corporation registered mitre.org in 1985 and the Aerospace
>Corporation registered aero.org in 1987. This idea that .ORG was only for
>non-profit organizations is an example of historical revisionism
>propogated by people who were not there at the time the TLDs were created.

Oh, Lord, let's settle this.  Anyone ever think of checking the *gasp!*
pertinent RFCs?:

RFC 1032              DOMAIN ADMINISTRATORS GUIDE          November 1987

      "COM" is meant to incorporate subdomains of companies and
      businesses.

      "EDU" was initiated to accommodate subdomains set up by
      universities and other educational institutions.

      "GOV" exists to act as parent domain for subdomains set up by
      government agencies.

      "MIL" was initiated to act as parent to subdomains that are
      developed by military organizations.

      "NET" was introduced as a parent domain for various network-type
      organizations.  Organizations that belong within this top-level
      domain are generic or network-specific, such as network service
      centers and consortia.  "NET" also encompasses network
      management-related organizations, such as information centers and
      operations centers.

      "ORG" exists as a parent to subdomains that do not clearly fall
      within the other top-level domains.  This may include technical-
      support groups, professional societies, or similar organizations.

Quite clearly, .net and .org are not intended to be catch-all TLDs for
folks whose .com domain name choice is taken; they have specific
organizational meanings.

In this, as in so many other matters related to the RFCs, Network Solutions
(and their progeny) flouts the 'rules' with impunity.  As someone else
pointed out, it *seems* that as soon as NSI was allowed to start profiting
from registrations, the idea of following any RFCs that might interfere
with the money flow fell by the wayside.

What do spammers and nails have in common?  They're both intended for
hammering.

Dean Robb
PC-Easy 
On-site computer services
(757) 495-EASY [3279]