This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/dns-wg@ripe.net/
[dns-wg] Elimination of 2nd level ccTLD domain names
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] Elimination of 2nd level ccTLD domain names
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] Elimination of 2nd level ccTLD domain names
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Piet Beertema
Piet.Beertema at cwi.nl
Thu Oct 21 12:56:43 CEST 2004
>Other countries in Europe already do this, at least including Belgium, >Netherlands, France, and Germany. Denmark, Sweden, Italy, Spain, Portugal, etc. They all followed the example that I set with .nl in 1986. Some now work with a mixture of 2nd and 3rd level domains. >Nevertheless, given the size of the population of the expanded EU, I >don't see how this kind of scheme will scale well to handle potentially >hundreds of millions of people. I don't think there's any need for that. What would private persons gain by registering <myname>.eu instead of <myname>.<ccTLD>? Adding something .co.eu (which the EU policy already rules out) or .com.eu wouldn't really alleviate the perceived problem. >I don't think you necessarily need to go to a US-style city.county.state.us >mechanism That's counterproductive: moving from one city to another, which is quite common for private persons, would imply a new domain name... >but I think a three-level domain scheme would definitely be advisable. It might be worth considering, but advisable? Not in my view. Piet
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] Elimination of 2nd level ccTLD domain names
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] Elimination of 2nd level ccTLD domain names
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]