Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site sdcsvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!mhuxn!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!jww
From: jww@sdcsvax.UUCP (Joel West)
Newsgroups: net.mail
Subject: Re: How to put UUCP hosts into world domain tree?
Message-ID: <1101@sdcsvax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 13-Sep-85 12:35:31 EDT
Article-I.D.: sdcsvax.1101
Posted: Fri Sep 13 12:35:31 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 19-Sep-85 06:16:16 EDT
References: <1469@cbosgd.UUCP>
Organization: CACI, Inc - Federal, La Jolla
Lines: 37
Summary: go with MHS

In article <1469@cbosgd.UUCP>, mark@cbosgd.UUCP (Mark Horton) writes:
> Possibilities include:
> 
> (4) fit into the MHS (X.400) name space, or some reasonable mapping of it.
>     This means that the top level is always a two letter country code,
>     and the level under that would be somewhat ad-hoc (they seem to be
>     moving in the direction of the organization at the next level, but
>     they don't require org names to be unique, and this isn't really
>     standardized yet.)  This seems to be very close to what the parts
>     of UUCP outside the USA and Canada want to do anyway.  We might have
>     subdivisions under US and/or Canada, those subdivisions might be
>     EDU, COM, and GOV, or they might be 8 or so geographic subdivisions,
>     or they might be the organizations themselves (if we can convince
>     ourselves we're really capable of handling that,) 

I vote for this.  Besides being a proposed(?) standard, ".US", ".UK",
and so on do have some real-world significance, rather than becoming
a historical artifcat to justify to our grandchildren.

I don't understand the politics of the name space control
issue.  Given the diversity of this country, I feel that
breaking the ".US" domain up into pieces is a necessity.  And
what if there are two "Westech" companies (there are)?  Who
arbites it?  One national, all powerful-registry?  Or regional
registries.

Incidentally, California is about 10% of the US population, but
more of the non-AT&T net.  It should probably be a separate
region.

Perhaps we could follow the territory of Local Operating Companies,
e.g., Pacific Bell, Bell South, US West, and so on.  Judge Green
had some sort of balance in mind. :-)

	Joel West	CACI, Inc. - Federal (c/o UC San Diego)
	{ucbvax,decvax,ihnp4}!sdcsvax!jww
	jww@SDCSVAX.ARPA


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com