🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Jul28.203324.15206@uwm.edu> jgd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu writes:
>From article <1992Jul27.135126.1626@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu>, by greenie@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu:
>
>>to it.  But since it was a test and not expected to remain online forever,
>>we did not bother registering the domain name - and we were under no obligation
>                                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>to do so because it was through the commercial Internet and therefor not
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>under the auspices of the NIC and the NSF.
>
>
> 2.  Assuming you really _have_ no obligation to register a temporary
>     domain name with "The NIC", how do you prevent collisions in the
>     domain name-space?  It would seem that there has to be _some_
>     central clearinghouse to prevent such collisions.
>     'lends' one of its _own_ IP addresses to this new entity.)

It is especially odd in light of what the advertising from UUNet and PSInet
(two major commercial network service providers) says.  According to their
promotional literature, one service that they will provide to anyone that
buys their Internet connection from them is domain registration at
the DDN Network Information Center.  Specifically, said literature states
that entries for any particular domain name will be registered at nic.ddn.mil.

Here is a question that, paradoxically, may help to clear this up:  Were
domain names to be used for connecting to the host in this test?  Specifically,
was it intended for users to telnet to "pleasure.com" (or whatever it was,)
or were they intended to telnet to xxx.yyy.zzz.www, a numbered IP address?  I
recall reading about this service in alt.sex, I think.  I believe that testers
were asked to telnet to a numbered address, rather than to a named address.

If this was indeed the case, then the lack of domain name registration would
make some sense, since it would not be intended for users to telnet to
"pleasure.com".  "pleasure.com" would simply be a convenient name to use
during the test -- especially if there were only one host in the "domain".

>Or am I missing something very obvious in what transpired here?

I must be missing something too.

>Confused and puzzled by the situation,

So am I.

>-- 
>John G Dobnick                          ATTnet: (414) 229-5727
>Computing Services Division             INTERNET: jgd@uwm.edu
>University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee     UUCP: uunet!uwm!jgd
>
>"Knowing how things work is the basis for appreciation,
>and is thus a source of civilized delight."  -- William Safire


-- 
D. Robert Spexet II, N0OKR   Internet:  spexet@math.lsa.umich.edu
Department of Mathematics    BITnet:    user68xr@umichum.bitnet
The University of Michigan   UUCP:      uunet!mailrus!math.lsa.umich.edu!spexet
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109