🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <50qoog$mom@gold.interlog.com>, Richard Sexton <richard@interlog.com> wrote:
>
> Alternic has it's own set of root servers. The "old guard" is not real
> happy about this, but thus far they have proven to be more reliable
> than the other root servers.

    I'll reserve judgement until more than 3% of the Internet is
hitting the Alternic roots for DNS queries.  What sort of screening
procedures and performance standards are there to ensure that future
Alternic root servers are as robust and reliable?  Granted that the
traditional root servers aren't without their bad days, but they have
been reliable and are used by 100% of the Internet.  I'm not a huge
fan of NSI either, but I don't see the Alternic as a solution or even
a viable alternative at this point.  Perhaps my judgement is tainted
by the politcking in the newdom list, and by Jim Fleming's absurd
comments when promoting the Alternic.

> Considering how fast "good" domain names go, and what some of them are
> worth today, it may be prudent to grab any name you may want in the
> future. There certainly is no guarentee the names will be
> grandfathered, but they may well be. 

    If they aren't, you're screwed if your business depends on it.  If
you're just holding on to it, you'll probably need a "real" domain
name in the meantime.  Back to square one.  Some people say that the
new TLD's will solve namespace collisions.  Technically they will, but
what's to stop someone who already has cybercafe.com from also
grabbing cybercafe.net, cyber.cafe, cybercafe.biz, cybercafe.www,
cybercafe.mall, etc., etc.?  And if they don't, I would think twice
before I registered cybercafe.biz, simply because of the potential
confusion between my domain name and cybercafe.com.

    I remain unconvinced (for now, anyway ;-)).
-- 
Brian Tao (BT300, taob@io.org, taob@ican.net)
Senior Systems and Network Administrator, Internet Canada Corp.
"Though this be madness, yet there is method in't"