Re: DNS under o=Internet

Kenneth Carlberg <carlberg@sparta.com> Tue, 04 February 1992 16:53 UTC

Received: from nri.reston.va.us by NRI.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa12171; 4 Feb 92 11:53 EST
Received: from bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk by NRI.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa12161; 4 Feb 92 11:53 EST
Received: from SPARTA.COM by bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk with Internet SMTP id <g.28349-0@bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk>; Tue, 4 Feb 1992 15:46:55 +0000
Received: from aslan.SPARTA.COM by sparta.com (5.65/1.34) id AA16997; Tue, 4 Feb 92 10:46:58 -0500
Received: by aslan (4.1/cfm-mcl-sub-1.1 (generic subsidiary)) id AA21609; Tue, 4 Feb 92 10:46:42 EST
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1992 10:46:42 -0500
From: Kenneth Carlberg <carlberg@sparta.com>
Message-Id: <9202041546.AA21609@aslan>
To: bmanning@is.rice.edu
Subject: Re: DNS under o=Internet
Cc: osi-ds@cs.ucl.ac.uk

> There has been a document on the tabnle for (.... long time) that has had
> the DNS tree under the root...
> Let me note the possible positions,...
>
> 1) At the root.
> 2) Move to a location with registration
> 3) Picking a subtree off the root
>
> My recommendation.   Go for 1)

As long as the subject came up...

Tangent: I have heard that the ROAD working group is giving serious
consideration to adapting the CLNP addressing scheme in the Internet
in order to address the current IP addressing problem (depletion).

Even if the above does not come to pass, and assuming the Internet
*does* migrate to fully multi-protocol internet, how does one propose
to do any type of reverse address lookup within the tree ? Perhaps 2)
might be worth some consideration. Or do I see a problem where none
really exists ?

-ken