On Oct 17, 2010, at 7:16 PM, James Hess wrote: > On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 11:46 PM, Day Domes <daydo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I have been tasked with coming up with a new name for are transit data >> network. I am thinking of using 101100010100110.net does anyone see >> any issues with this? > > The domain-name starts with a digit, which is not really recommended, RFC > 1034, > due to the fact a valid actual hostname cannot start with a digit,
A valid actual hostname can start with a digit. Many do. I'm guessing 3com may have had something to do with that trend. RFC 1123 2.1 clarified that a couple of decades ago, so I doubt you'll find any running software that doesn't agree. > and, for example, > some MTAs/MUAs, that comply with earlier versions of standards still in use, > will possibly have a problem sending e-mail to the flat domain, even > if the actual hostname is > something legal such as mail.101100010100110.net. > > Which goes back to one of the standard-provided definitions of domain > name syntax used by RFC 821 page 29: There are several less obsolete RFCs that specify email addresses, they're all quite specific about what a valid hostname is in an email sense. 5321 is the latest, I think, section 4.1.2. Cheers, Steve
