Re: .com and the TLD debacle

Dirk Fieldhouse <fieldhouse@logica.com> Thu, 30 November 1995 15:01 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa16190; 30 Nov 95 10:01 EST
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa16153; 30 Nov 95 10:01 EST
Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa06370; 30 Nov 95 10:01 EST
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa16043; 30 Nov 95 10:01 EST
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa15866; 30 Nov 95 9:59 EST
Received: from venera.isi.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa06147; 30 Nov 95 9:59 EST
Received: from relay1.pipex.net by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22) id <AA02592>; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 06:59:06 -0800
Received: from juliet.logica.com by flow.pipex.net with SMTP (PP); Thu, 30 Nov 1995 14:58:24 +0000
Received: by juliet.logica.com; id OAA20590; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 14:58:16 GMT
Received: from romeo.logica.co.uk(158.234.8.75) by juliet.logica.com via smap (g3.0.3) id xma020576; Thu, 30 Nov 95 14:57:53 GMT
Received: (from news@localhost) by romeo.logica.co.uk (8.7/8.7.1) id OAA15674; Thu, 30 Nov 1995 14:57:55 GMT
To: info-ietf@pipex.net
Path: usenet
X-Orig-Sender: ietf-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Dirk Fieldhouse <fieldhouse@logica.com>
Newsgroups: info.ietf
Subject: Re: .com and the TLD debacle
Date: 30 Nov 1995 14:57:55 GMT
Organization: Logica plc (for whom I do not speak)
Lines: 32
Message-Id: <49kgpj$eg7@romeo.logica.co.uk>
References: <95112916072830@engr05.comsys.rockwell.com>
Nntp-Posting-Host: 158.234.36.92
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.7

In article <95112916072830@engr05.comsys.rockwell.com>;, 
manfredi@engr05.comsys.rockwell.com says...
>
>> I suspect that "Vermont Teddybears" would do better with a
>> teddybears.whatever.vt.us address than with a .com address. I also
>> suspect that my local gym is probably better off with a .nyc.ny.us
>> address because their business is intimately tied to a particular
>> place -- their customers would no longer be the same if they were
>> elsewhere.
>> 
>> However, for many businesses, being location independent or being
>> "high tech" or whatever is part of their image.
>
>You know, although this might have been true at one time, I don't think
>it is anymore. There's nothing "low tech" about cern.ch, itu.ch, bbc.uk,
>or siemens.de. I really think that .com implies either US or US-based,
>and not a heck of a lot more.

I don't think that's how the rest of the world sees it. We see .com as 
shorthand for what would be co.int (actually, I suppose there is such a thing 
anyway) and the use of .com by local US companies as an accident of history: a 
reward, almost, for being there first, like British stamps not having the 
country name. If a global DNS namespace were designed now, we would expect 
co.us to be on a par with other co.nations.

-- 
Dirk Fieldhouse
fieldhouse@logica.com
c=gb;a=tmailuk;p=logica;
o=lg;ou1=lgwct;s=fieldhouse
+44 (171) 637 9111