[dns-operations] TLD(s) for private use

[James Stevens]

Cool tech! Thanks for sharing.

On 06/09/17 22:42, Geert Jan de Groot wrote:
> I would be in favor of having a TLD that is known never to be delegated
> as Warren proposes. A little background:
> These days I am developing semiconductor-chip lithography machines:
> large and very, very, very complex machines that are used to do pattern
> projection with sub-nanometer accuracy to produce computer chips.
> 
> These machines have several hundred computer nodes all working
> together to yield the required accuracy. We're not talking simply
> computers, but in some cases even gate arrays that implement a
> protocol stack. In many aspects we're very close to theoretical
> physical limits, which is why these things are so complex.
> To use commercial components where possible, DNS is used inside.
> 
> The current internally-used TLD stems from a long time before
> the "many new TLD" activities even started, and I worry someone
> will sunrise it. I did not make the decision for the approach we
> now have, but I do have to deal with it's consequences.
> 
> "registering a domain to prevent someone else deploying it" doesn't
> work very well because our machines have a very long economic lifetime
> because of cost - we're still supporting 20-year old machines and
> know we'll need to do so for a long time, and for "current" machines
> we're also looking at a decade or so and likely much longer.
> 
> The dynamics of this industry is very different from the
> Internet industry we all know. For better or worse, having
> 'internal' or similar would go a long way to convince powers that be
> that the approach used should change.
> 
> Just trying to share a different point of view,
> 
> Geert Jan
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dns-operations mailing list
> dns-operations at lists.dns-oarc.net
> https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations
> dns-operations mailing list
> https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations
>