ka@hou3c.UUCP (Kenneth Almquist) (05/15/84)
The NameDroppers mailing list on the ARPANET is for discussion of domain naming conventions, e. g. what top level domains should exist and who should be permitted to set up subdomains. Does anybody want this list gatewayed into a USENET group? The group might be named net.mail.names or fa.namedroppers; other suggestions are welcome. I haven't discussed this with the maintainer of the list yet so I don't whether a gateway is possible, but I want to see whether there is interest first. Kenneth Almquist
bob@basser.SUN (Bob Kummerfeld) (05/20/84)
We are adding domain handling to the Sydney Unix Network software and would be very interested in discussion of domains in general. A new news group (net.mail.domain or something) would seem the ideal way to get the discussion going. Bob Kummerfeld, University of Sydney Computer Science ...!decvax!mulga!bob:basser
robert@erix.UUCP (Robert Virding) (05/23/84)
I would also be interested in a discussion on domains. The idea of creating
a new news group seems to be the best idea.
Robert Virding @ L M Ericsson, Stockholm
UUCP: {decvax,philabs}!mcvax!enea!erix!robert
P.S. To the importers of news to Europe: if such a group was started would
it be too much to ask that we could read it in Europe as well.per@erix.UUCP (Per Hedeland) (05/23/84)
Domain discussions would be interesting to us, especially in relation
to the UUCP world. I guess gatewaying to the ARPA list is a good idea,
although their way of organizing things seems to be a bit different.
In fact, we are considering setting up a domain for access to a bunch of
non-UNIX (imagine!) VAXen here, and would like opinions on the best way to
go about it. Are "local" domains a la DEC and SUN are emerging as some
kind of de facto standard, rather than subdomains (user@host.subdomain.UUCP)?
Although the latter are probably preferrable from an administrative point
of view, they are hardly compatible with the current UUCP addressing.
(See? I did what the big guys say - didn't vote, but provided material
for: net.mail.domains
or whatever it should be called.)
Per Hedeland
per@erix.UUCP or ...{devax,philabs}!mcvax!enea!erix!perhans@log-hb.UUCP (Hans Albertsson) (05/24/84)
[]
Same interest from us here at TeleLOGIC. Same problem, too, with
accessing VMS-machines as local domains.
--
{decvax,philabs}!mcvax!enea!log-hb!hans
Hans Albertsson,
TeleLOGIC AB
Box 1001,
S-14901 Nynashamn,
SWEDENmark@cbosgd.UUCP (Mark Horton) (06/05/84)
In fact, we are considering setting up a domain for access to a
bunch of non-UNIX (imagine!) VAXen here, and would like
opinions on the best way to go about it. Are "local" domains a
la DEC and SUN are emerging as some kind of de facto standard,
rather than subdomains (user@host.subdomain.UUCP)?
For anyone considering setting up their own domain, I'd like to offer
some advice based on the direction the ARPA Internet appears to be headed.
A name like foo@mulga.SUN is not really a local domain. It appears to the
rest of the world to be a top level domain, if it ever escapes from your
own organization. (And you can be sure that if you have access to UUCP
or any other large electronic mail network that it will get out.)
The Internet has set up specific guidelines for top level domains. In
general, there will not be many top level domains, and it's hard to get
one. The latest ARPA proposal had 6 of them: ARPA, DDN, EDU, COR, GOV,
and PUB - the first 2 amount to special treatment for ARPANET and MILNET,
the other 4 attempt to categorize everyone else as educational, corporate,
government, or public. No, nobody is happy with this, and it probably
will be changed again, but it gives you an idea of what a top level domain is.
The requirements for being a top level domain will almost certainly include
(1) having a responsible person, (2) having a robust registry and nameserver,
(3) being large. ("large" is currently defined as "over 1000 hosts", but
this is also being debated, perhaps it will be defined in terms of users or
traffic.)
UUCP will meet the requirements, the UUCP project is currently building a
map and software to use it, and we have over 2000 hosts. DEC could also
qualify if they wanted to, as the DEC ENET has over 2000 hosts. Ditto for
IBM's VNET. Smaller networks are not clear - the SUN network in Australia
and BITNET would not qualify as top level domains under the current rules.
AT&T has over 600 hosts but currently plans to be a subdomain of UUCP.
HP may wind up as a subdomain of UUCP as well.
So what do you do? Well, my advice is to organize your subdomain as a tree
and give it a name, but plan on attaching it in as a subdomain of some other
domain at some future date. UUCP will probably allow subdomains shortly
after the main domain starts working, but the rules haven't been established
yet. Likely subdomains of UUCP include ATT, HP, and EUR (or some other
preferred abbreviation for Europe.)
For example, if I had a small company called, say, TPC, with 5 hosts,
I might name them after something original, like letters of the alphabet,
and designate one as the gateway:
TPC
/ / | \ \
A B C D E
where "A.TPC" is the gateway, also known as TPC. Then I might generate
addresses like "Mark.Horton@TPC" or "mark@D.TPC". I would fully expect
someone to eventually start yelling at me, saying "there is no top level
domain TPC, you can't use that address". So I would be keeping my ear to
the ground, watching for a parent domain to hook into, and as soon as a
suitable parent appeared, I would attach the TPC tree, generating addresses
like "Mark.Horton@TPC.USA.UUCP", (assuming that "USA.UUCP" was the parent
domain.) If a parent appears before somebody yells at me, great. If somebody
yells before a parent appears, well, we have to call ourselves something.
However, while calling ourselves an illegal name, we should expect some
of our mail to be dropped on the floor by hosts that don't understand it.
By the way, don't subdivide your domain into subdomains unless you have
no alternative. One level should be sufficient for hundreds of hosts.
If you attach in at the 2nd level, you could find your users having to
list their addresses as A.CB.OHIO.TPC.USA.UUCP, when A.TPC.USA.UUCP is
much easier for users to type and no harder to implement. If you want
to subdivide administratively, fine, but don't make it show up in the
domain names of hosts.
Mark Hortonmark@cbosgd.UUCP (Mark Horton) (06/05/84)
Alas, such a gateway is not to be. Postel said that NameDroppers was intended to be a small list of people actively working on the problems, and it's already gotten too large. If it were gatewayed onto Usenet, it would be impossible to control. If Ken wants to post transcripts to keep people informed, fine. Anyone who really feels they have something to contribute should either get on the mailing list (making a case that they are not just along for the ride) or express their concerns to one of us that is on the mailing list, and we can forward them or summarize. Postel also indicated that NameDroppers has just about run its course, and that it would probably be subsumed into Header-People soon. Header-People is already gatewayed (courtesy of Ken) into net.mail.headers. Mark