>> This is a really good point. I think there does need to be a .ALT registry >> in order for .ALT to be able to >address anything other than experimental uses. >And I think this would actually be a good thing. > >If we created a registry for alt, how would alt not be just another >TLD with exactly the same status as any other domain name registry? >You can already register a name in the DNS registries and not turn it >on in the DNS.
I think the key difference would be that it would accept any number of entries for the same string, and would have a pointer to the place where you can download the code that implements it. If you use foo.alt and I use foo.alt, well, that's our problem. There is also no reason to have only one such registry, or why any organization with a name starting with "I" would run any of them. As I mentioned before, given that the whole point of .alt is that people are implementing things that look like DNS names but are resolved in some other way, the winner of any such conflict is the one with widely used running code. R's, John _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
