Re: Update of RFC 2606 based on the recent ICANN changes ?

[Dave Crocker <dhc2 at dcrocker.net>]

Lyman Chapin wrote:
>    If it were possible to put that aside, 
> would you have any other objection to single label hostnames? I know 
> that at least some of the interest in new gTLDs has been expressed by 
> companies that like the idea of using a globally-recognized trademark as 
> a TLD - for example, "customerservice at ibm" (not to imply that IBM is one 
> of the companies that has expressed this sort of interest).

What will be the impact of having, perhaps,

  1)  millions of entries in the root servers, and

  2)  constant traffic banging on those servers?

Historically, the view has been that bloating the root servers in that way would 
be very dangerous.

Counter-claims observe that .com seems to have survived with a similar storage 
and traffic pattern, so why should there be a problem moving the pattern up one 
level?

d/

--

  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf