Re: PAB Nom Charter 1st Draft

John C Klensin (
Mon, 02 Mar 1998 02:55:28 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)

On Sun, 01 Mar 1998 18:21:04 +0900 "Robert F. Connelly"
<> wrote:

> If some "smith" gets "smith.nom" wouldn't he/she have the
>right to farm out lower level domains to others?

> Or will he be limited to letting his family use the domain,
> e.g. jacob-jinkelheimer@smith.nom?

Well, looks as if we have just discovered the ultimate absurd
examples of flat, uniquely-owned, name spaces. You might look
at RFCs 1779 and 1781 as attempts at ways out of the mess the
above implies.

Having a single person or entity as the unique and worldwide
Smith-registrar, or taking the position that a single
cooperating family of "Smith"s could own the name and keep
anyone else from using it, is a pretty amazing thought.

The X.500 distinguished name model, while miserable in many
respects, at least avoids that particular problem and might
provide a model for what part of a name belonged in the domain
and what part only in, say, an email address. On the other
hand, to the degree to which it is a useful model, it very
nearly would suggest that names/designators of individuals
belong in country code domains, not generic ones.