Hahahahaha! That is awesome.
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 17:50, wrote:
> back in the day,
>
> abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz1234567890ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ.ca.us.
>
> existed to test the length of DNS label. circa 1992
>
> ^b.com also existed (yes, we considered ^p)
>
>
> the heady days of DN
back in the day,
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz1234567890ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ.ca.us.
existed to test the length of DNS label. circa 1992
^b.com also existed (yes, we considered ^p)
the heady days of DNS evolution!
/bill
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 06:16:46PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
On 07/10/11 7:41 PM, Joe Hamelin wrote:
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 7:30 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
- Original Message -
"3com.com"
I recall that 3M was originally mmm.com because they wouldn't allow a number
to start a domain.
/me runs whois mmm.com
Yep, Created on..: 1988-10-3
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 8:25 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>Yes, this was because some very old (current at the time, however)
>implementations of gethostbyname(3) were implemented in such a way that if
>the first character they saw returned isdigit()==TRUE, then,
>they would assume that they had been pas
Yes, this was because some very old (current at the time, however)
implementations of gethostbyname(3) were implemented in such a way that if
the first character they saw returned isdigit()==TRUE, then,
they would assume that they had been passed an IP address
and would attempt to encode the string
- Original Message -
> From: "Joe Hamelin"
> Subject: Re: Were A record domain names ever limited to 23 characters?
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 7:30 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Message -
> > "3com.com"
>
> I recall that 3M
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 7:30 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
- Original Message -
> "3com.com"
I recall that 3M was originally mmm.com because they wouldn't allow a number
to start a domain.
/me runs whois mmm.com
Yep, Created on..: 1988-10-31.
but wait, 3m.com Created on.
- Original Message -
> From: "steve pirk [egrep]"
> What was so funny was that someone got Internic/Network Solutions to up the
> limit. Apparently just to save some money on reprinting movie posters... ok,
> so they would have had to change some trailers...
> ;-]
"3com.com"
Cheers,
--
NSI was never the only registrar. They were just the only registrar
for COM, ORG, NET, EDU, and possibly a few other TLDs, but,
they were, for example, never the registrar for US or many other
CCTLDs.
Therefore, it was not internet wide, though I will admit that it did
cover most of the widely kno
> You may be referring to a limitation of a certain OS regarding a hostname; or
> some network's policy.
No. See http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc810.txt
"ASSUMPTIONS
1. A "name" (Net, Host, Gateway, or Domain name) is a text string up
to 24 characters drawn from the alphabet (A-Z), digits (0-
It turns out it was an artificial limitation on Network Solution's part.
Being the only registrar at the time, it was pretty much internet wide at
that point, contrary to the RFC spec.
What was so funny was that someone got Internic/Network Solutions to up the
limit. Apparently just to save some m
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Joe Hamelin wrote:
> I remember tales from when there was an eight character limit. But that was
> back when you didn't have to pay for them and they assigned you a class-c
> block automatically. Of course it took six weeks to register because there
> was only o
I posted a story about a domain that was one character too long on Google+.
A few old-school Disney Online people remembered it enough to comment/+1 it,
and agreed that it did happen. This event has bothered me for years, because
everyone seemed to think long names were always possible. I kept thin
On Friday, September 30, 2011 05:54:38 PM steve pirk [egrep] wrote:
> I seem to recollect back the 1999 or 2000 times that I was unable to
> register a domain name that was 24 characters long. Shortly after that, I
> heard that the character limit had been increased to like 128 characters,
> and we
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 02:54:38PM -0700, steve pirk [egrep] wrote:
> I seem to recollect back the 1999 or 2000 times that I was unable to
> register a domain name that was 24 characters long...
I remember tales from when there was an eight character limit. But that was
back when you didn't h
Found a decent starting reference. It was a Network solutions limit... I
*knew* it! LOL
http://www.123-domain-register.com/longdomainnames.htm
The domain in question was inspectorgadgetthemovie.com 27 characters long
including the .tld. I was off by one, the limit was 22 characters for the A
recor
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 02:54:38PM -0700, steve pirk [egrep] wrote:
> I seem to recollect back the 1999 or 2000 times that I was unable to
> register a domain name that was 24 characters long. Shortly after that, I
> heard that the character limit had been increased to like 128 characters,
> and we
I seem to recollect back the 1999 or 2000 times that I was unable to
register a domain name that was 24 characters long. Shortly after that, I
heard that the character limit had been increased to like 128 characters,
and we were able to register the name.
Can anyone offer some input, or is this a
18 matches
Mail list logo
