Re: [ga] 0:212 BIZ.....going out of BIZness ?

["Jim Fleming" <JimFleming@ameritech.net>]

From: "John Palmer" <jp@ADNS.NET>
> There is no such thing as "128-bit DNS". If so, where are the RFCs for the technical
> standards?
========

By RFC, do you mean something like this ?

http://www.armware.dk/RFC/rfc/rfc25.html
http://rfc.sunsite.dk/rfc/rfc25.html
http://community.roxen.com/developers/idocs/rfc/rfc25.html
Network Working Group                                      Steve Crocker
Request for Comments: 25                                            UCLA
                                                         30 October 1969

                           NO HIGH LINK NUMBERS

Because it may be desirable to reserve one or more link numbers for
instrumentation purposes, and because 256 link numbers are many more
than are needed, we suggest that no link number over 63 be used.  At
UCLA, we will implement our tables to take advantage of this limitation.
We also note that 32 may be even more realistic, but 64 is certainly
sufficient.
===========================================================================
With respect to "128-bit DNS"...are you familiar with AAAA DNS Records ?
AAAA Records are not to be confused with A6 Records...used with IPv6...
AAAA Records are very similar to A Records...which contain 32-bits...
AAAA Records contain 128-bits...which is 32x4=128...note the four letters (AAAA)
Are you familiar with the 160-bits in an IPv4 Header ?
Do you know which of those 160-bits (in the IPv4 Header) are set when you put an A Record in the DNS ?
Do you know which of those 160-bits (in the IPv4 Header) are set when you put a 128-bit AAAA Record in the DNS ?
To make it more simple, how about when you put the year (2002) in the left-most 128-bits ?
http://www.ethereal.com
http://www.netfilter.org
Have you tried ?....2911: ?...or next year's version ?...2003: ?...or 3911: ?
Jim Fleming2002:[IPv4]:000X:03DB:...IPv8 is closer than you
think...http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-spacehttp://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Palmer" <jp@ADNS.NET>
To: "Ga" <ga@dnso.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 10:39 PM
Subject: Re: [ga] 0:212 BIZ.....going out of BIZness ?


> I see your point. The registrants are the ones that are the "paying customers"
> and the ones most affected by root servers, gtld servers and the follks who
> make policies about them.
>
> Remember: ICANN created the collision of up to 3500 SLDs by allowing
> duplicate SLDs to be created. There are potentially 3500 "victims"
>
> John
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Fleming" <JimFleming@ameritech.net>
> To: <ga@dnso.org>
> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 6:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [ga] 0:212 BIZ.....going out of BIZness ?
>
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "John Palmer" <jp@ADNS.NET>
> > To: <ga@dnso.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 9:05 AM
> > Subject: Re: [ga] 0:212 BIZ.....going out of BIZness ?
> >
> >
> > > The other .BIZ has been in existence since 1995 and is still going.
> > >
> > ===================================================
> >
> > John,
> >
> > With all due respect, there are not two .BIZ TLDs.
> > .BIZ is three letters. It is only spelled one way....B...I...Z...
> >
> > All that really matters, moving forward, is the list of [SLD].BIZ owners.
> > Apparently, the I* society insiders have helped to do some market research
> > and Proof-of-Concept testing, to bring these potential customers to light.
> > Someone should thank them for their efforts, but not pay them anything.
> > They are non-profit, public benefit, volunteer organizations, or supposed to be.
> >
> > If there are enough serious .BIZ owners to move past the market trial phase,
> > then commercial companies will likely deploy 128-bit DNS services for the
> > .BIZ owners. How many serious .BIZ owners are there ? 50,000 ? 80,000 ?
> >
> >
>
> There is no such thing as "128-bit DNS". If so, where are the RFCs for the technical
> standards?
>
> John
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
>

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html