This may not be the right forum for this request, but if not, I apologise but you might be able to point me in the right direction. What is the prevailing view on "provider based" DNS naming on Internet. I.e. is there something that can be done to disuade a provider - say provider.top from registering his customer companies as company1.provider.top company2.provider.top etc.. and thus attempting to lock these companies into their services (refusing to rewrite their mailing addresses as name@company.top and honoring MX'es for company.top pointing to provider.top). Do you know of a RIPE/ISOC documentation on this issue - or is this behaviour generally considered so obviously stupid that no one has thought of mentioning it? Thanks in advance Marius Olafsson SURIS/ISnet
I.e. is there something that can be done to disuade a provider - say provider.top from registering his customer companies as company1.provider.top company2.provider.top etc.. The rules for registering a domain under .NL explicitly forbid this (short-form translation: "subdomains under a domain registered by an organisation may only pertain to said organisation; registering third parties under the domain is not allowed"). Piet
Piet Beertema <Piet.Beertema@cwi.nl> writes * I.e. is there something that can be done to disuade a provider - say * provider.top from registering his customer companies as * company1.provider.top * company2.provider.top etc.. * The rules for registering a domain under .NL explicitly * forbid this (short-form translation: "subdomains under a * domain registered by an organisation may only pertain to * said organisation; registering third parties under the * domain is not allowed"). Hmm, does this only apply to real domains or also to hostnames which is very usual practice for dialin/SLIP type of providers? It basically comes down to the same thing. company.provider.top A a.b.c.d or company.provider.top NS some.where.else in my view is kind of the same, at least in binding the companies domain name and email address to the provider. Even in NL the first one is common practice. -Marten
Hmm, does this only apply to real domains or also to hostnames which Only to real domains. is very usual practice for dialin/SLIP type of providers? It basically comes down to the same thing. company.provider.top A a.b.c.d or company.provider.top NS some.where.else in my view is kind of the same, at least in binding the companies domain name and email address to the provider. Even in NL the first one is common practice. As far as I know this only goes for private persons, not for companies. Of course companies can obtain a mailbox on a service provider's host, making their e-mail address user@company.provider.top, but that is something I don't consider a real domain. And if a company has a SLIP link to a provider, the company can have its own domain and have the SLIP link act as just the carrier for the domain, just like in the "past" UUCP acted as domain carrier. Piet
participants (3)
-
marius＠isgate.is -
Marten Terpstra -
Piet Beertema