🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <BsFs4J.8H0@comp.vuw.ac.nz>, mark@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Mark Davies)
 writes:
> 
> In article <1992Aug4.125522.9839@waikato.ac.nz>, john@waikato.ac.nz (John Houlker) writes:
> |> We can always hope :-).  Yes AQ has appeal but at least the NSF
> |> component of the IAC doesn't seem so keen on it so far, and I'll
> |> need to check its kosher.
> 
> kosher?  What like usp.ac.nz? :-)

There hangs a tale; we used usp.ac.nz as a temporary convenience
while we were asking for usp.int (since the USP is a multinational
organisation) - ominously, after a number of attempts over a long
while we had no response from the INT maintainers, and by then
usp.ac.nz was (no surprise) being used quite generally.  In the end
this attempt was abandoned and usp.fj created instead.  I have
warned the NSF that I've had difficulty contacting the INT people,
but given some recent comments in namedroppers I've some hopes that
a new request might succeed.

> Isn't DNS admin supposed to be distributed.  It is entirely up to the
> administrators of the .aq domain what goes under it (and the admins of .nz
> what goes under there).

I believe that's true but it is worth noting what others consider
sound (and ignoring what we don't agree with of course), but
I think AQ is somewhat unusual and it will be more important
to look to global views than is the case with normal national
domains.

Also note that there are some quite different views about the
purpose of the top level domains; one approach is that INT is some
sort of aberration and EDU, COM, GOV, MIL, NET, and ORG are
international/multinational domains, while US and all the other
national domains should be used for locationally defined private
names.  This may be one reason why some US agencies seem a little
slow making use of AQ perhaps.  The extreme postion here would I
suppose mean that the subdomains of NZ should correspond to
provinces and perhaps mobile addresses ranges.

John