On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 05:15:46PM +0000, Steven Ryerse wrote: > .com permutations is limited too.
Yes, and my mail pointed out how. > IPv4 addresses and .com domain names are both just Internet > resources that Internet users need to use the Internet. They're different kinds of resources, though. Protocol parameters are also just Internet resources, but there are different policies for how you get a DNS RRTYPE number, a UDP or TCP port number, and so on; and these policies are different to how one gets an IP address or a domain name. Saying, "Just resources, therefore they should have the same policy," effectively claims that there are no differences between these kinds of resources; I claim that's false. > Also IPv4 cannot somehow be saved by conservation. Regardless of > any policy, ARIN will run out of IPv4 probably within the next year. > If .com domain names were nearing runout, would that really make it > OK to start denying small Orgs .com domain name requests? The argument for the minimum allocation policy is not "size of org", but "amount of use given the allocation and minimum allocation size given the Internet routing system". I don't have any trouble imagining that a name registry approaching identifier exhaustion could adopt a policy that domain names in the registry would be required to be used (or the registration would be revoked). In fact, some name registries do have separate allocation policies for "reservation" and "registration". Xxx does this, for instance (a very effective revenue-plumping move, I am told). Of course, the differences between naming and numbering probably mean that such a restriction in the name case would be silly except in particular cases (like xxx). And that's sort of the point: the analogy isn't doing the work you want here, because the differences between names and numbers means that policy for one of them is not good in the other case. For example, number resources can't be handed out one at a time for the sake of the routing system, but domain names are _always_ allocated that way. Best regards, A -- Andrew Sullivan a...@anvilwalrusden.com _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.