On Sun, 2003-02-02 at 15:14, Roger B.A. Klorese wrote:
> Dave Warren wrote:
>
> >Right now, if <yourname>.com is taken, you can grab <yourname>.net or .biz
> >or .info or whatever else fits your needs, and from a marketing point of
> >view it is nearly as effective.
> >
> You should only use .net if you use it for its intended purpose -- the
> infrastructure nodes of a network. As for .info, again, use it only if
> you're providing information -- running a business off .info is a
> disservice to its intended clientele. And as for .biz, it's a total
> failure.
>
> >Now, .com/.net/.org/.biz/.info are not entirely interchangable, but in many
> >cases a domain legitimately falls into more then one. An ISP, for example,
> >is a good fit under .COM/.NET and .BIZ, but not really as much under .ORG or
> >.INFO (Although nothing stops you)
> >
>
> An ISP should only use .net for its routers and infrastructure nodes.
> If it provides access to users, those should be on .com, or if they
> don't care about anyone actually finding them, .biz.
>
> And not reserving .org for non-profits is one of the great travesties of
> recent history.
When people make this claim, I know to discount anything they have to
say on this subject, because they clearly have no real understanding of
the history of the DNS.
.org was never a TLD For non-profits. That many choose to make their
home there is not a reason that it should, then or now, be reserved for
their use.
.org was the true "catch all" TLD for anything that didn't fit elsewhere
for whatever reason.
-- domainwhiz@yahoo.com <domainwhiz@yahoo.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Tue Oct 19 2004 - 23:37:37 EDT