Dan and all,
Very good points here Dan. I completely agree. It does seem
a bit strange though coming form and IBM person, as it seems that
the GIP www.gip.com and one of your Sr. folks, John Patrick
don't seem to agree with your view here. Comments??
Dan Cohen wrote:
> If there is complexity in the older system it is because complexity is
> required, not because the designers were inclined to complex structures.
> Are you the only Bob Allisat in Toronto? What if you are in multiple
> locations? I agree that there is room for improvement, and always room
> for methods of shielding the end user from the complexity of the
> addressing system; this gives tremendous benefits.
>
> As far as "being written in the same manner as all other correspondances
> in history," what was designed for a city was not good for the country;
> what is designed for communicating within the country is not good on a
> global scale; and finally, who says that the Internet has to be like
> anything else in history, when it could be better?
>
> - Dan Cohen
>
> Bob Allisat wrote:
>
> > The addressing system I envision has little
> > or nothing in common with the silly strings
> > of the legacy whatever at something dot another
> > thing dot more dot TLD system we are currently
> > suffering under. Regardless of what address we
> > choose to identify opurselves with as citizens
> > using the Internet - and it will be *our* choice
> > not the dumb Post Office's or stupid ICANN's -
> > it will be written in the same manner as all
> > other correspondences in history. In a legible,
> > easy to read manner. For Example:
> >
> > Bob Allisat, Toronto.
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
