On Monday 07 August 2006 15:20, Obantec Support wrote: > What would 192.com or 118118.com do without these names?
Deal with the fact that the RFCs don't support such names, and petition for a new RFC that accomodates their names? Other businesses have had no issues adapting to the requirements of the RFCs, so why they should be singled out, I don't know.
