RE: Suggestions for the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names a nd Numbers

[Patrik Fältström <paf@swip.net>]

At 10.26 -0500 98-11-11, Marsh, Miles (Gene) wrote:
>Even if
>it is determined that, for the forseeable future, an arbitrary limit of
>hundreds of new TLDs is appropriate, the structure should be set NOW for
>thousands, tens of thousands, even millions of TLDs.

I still see a number of arguments for keeping zones small:

- The larger the zones, the higher risk of getting operational problems. 
This because if nothing else the number of changes in a large zone is 
larger than the number of changes in a small zone. The fact that one change 
a zone increase the risk of differences between the replicated DNS servers 
for the zone.

- Even if we have a lot of TLDs, we will still have problems with 
uniqueness of names, and the true fact that one TLD creates a monopoly -- 
regardless if we have 10, hundred or millions of TLDs. Each one will be a 
monopoly.

- DNS is a hierarichal system. It is designed to be hierarichal. A flat 
namespace in not what will work, because of uniqueness and other issues.

Increasing the number of TLDs don't solve the problem people normally see 
with the few gTLDs we have.

     Patrik

------------------------------------------------------------------
Area Director, Applications Area               Email: paf@swip.net
IETF                                             URL: http://paf.se
                                          PGP Key ID: 0xBD236602

   In theory there is no difference between theory and practice,
   but in practice, there is.