Re: WCIT outcome?

[Dave Crocker <[e-mail]>]

On 1/1/2013 10:52 AM, John Day wrote:
> I was thinking about that after I sent my email.  I actually don't think
> there is an argument for ITU holding the IANA function.

And just to make sure my own message was clear:  I wasn't commenting on 
the merits of the view, but merely trying to report the facts of what I 
recall taking place at the time.


> Domain names I guess would follow since there are merely macro strings
> for network addresses.

While this is a topic serving more as a discussion black hole than 
likely to engender intellectual opportunity, I'll point out that domain 
names are -- and I think always have been -- quite a bit more than 
merely being macros for network addresses.

The mapping to network addresses has (always?) been the primary use, but 
they are a discrete name space with social as well as operational uses. 
  That is, the social aspects serve as distinct from the mapping aspects.

For that matter, the operational uses have extended considerably beyond 
mapping to addresses.  Given my own activities with DKIM, the obvious 
exemplar is mapping to security parameters.

d/
-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net