Subject: Re: Diacritical application in the DNS

From: Johnny Eriksson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 100 17:53:49 WET

[email-masked] (Dan Kolis) wrote:

> 123.34.56.67 has got to be easier to enter than www.bq--abzw55tnn5zq.se

Yes, but the problem is that the first one represents an IP address,
which is at the addressing level, and can change, while the second
one is at the naming level, as a synonyme to the original name, and
something that DNS then looks up to get the CURRENT address.

If easy-to-type was the original problem we could do away with DNS
altogether and just use IP addresses everywhere, that could even get
rid of a lot of lawyers...

--Johnny

---

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 14:50:19 -0500

> rid of a lot of lawyers...

if it would really get rid of lawyers, it would be well worth it...

Keith

p.s. the lawyers wouldn't give up so easily...they would simply
insist that we support IP addresses with octet values greater than 255.

---

From: "Henning G. Schulzrinne" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 15:47:14 -0500

> insist that we support IP addresses with octet values greater than 255.

And they would insist that something like

180.035.069.037

would spell 1-800-Flowers and try to reserve an IP address based on that
name.
-- 
Henning Schulzrinne   http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~hgs

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2000 14:00:12 -0800 (PST)

> And they would insist that something like

Believe it or not, the SRI NIC did get at least one request for a vanity
IP address around 1988-89.  As your example notes, they wanted it to
spell out the name of the organization.

It's awfully hard to parody marketing, isn't it?
				regards,
					Ted Hardie