Interesting new dns failures

Steve Gibbard scg at
Mon May 21 22:02:54 UTC 2007

On Mon, 21 May 2007, Tim Franklin wrote:

> The case that gets a bit murky for me is genuinely multi-national entities. 
> In *theory* that ought to be what .com is for, but registering 
> for every country where you have an operating entity looks sort of legit.

Why only sort of?

To analogize this to the phone network, there's a country code, +800, for 
international toll free calls.  There are also various national or regional 
toll free dialing codes, such as 1-800 numbers in the NANPA region (US, 
Canada, Caribbean), or 0800 numbers in the UK.

Looking at ads targeting the US market, I see lots of 1-800 numbers. 
Looking at ads targeting the UK market, I see lots of 0800 numbers.  In 
other countries, I see their own conventions.  I'm guessing if I dialed 
any of those numbers, the phone would be answered in the language the ad 
was written in, and prices would be quoted in the currency of the place 
where the ad was published.  I'm not sure I've ever noticed a +800 number 
being advertised, despite its status as a global standard.

Is this wrong?  Would those trying to sell things to Americans get more 
business by dropping their familiar 1-800 numbers is favor of what their 
customers would see as 011-800 numbers?  Would those trying to sell things 
to the British do better if they made people dial 00-800 rather than 0800? 
Or, for that matter, would those trying to sell things in France do better 
if their phones were answered in English?

Is the above situation any different from the decision of whether to use 
locally-expected ccTLDs for local content, or to use the "international" 
.com for everything?


More information about the NANOG mailing list