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. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
