[ih] internet-history Digest, Vol 39, Issue 7

[Vint Cerf]

perhaps the point has been made but the motivation for these TLDs was  
to parse the responsibility for registration into very distinct  
categories so that the work could be delegated without too much  
dispute over jurisdiction but still covered the range of then-foreseen  
participants in the use of the Internet system.


On Jan 20, 2010, at 7:19 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:

> Some years ago, Jake Feinler said that there was a persistent, non- 
> converging debate in the community about the TLD choices.
>
> She asserted that there was finally some small face-to-face  
> discussion where she ran out of patience and declared that the  
> choices would be com, net and org.
>
> I have a somewhat more vague recollection of her acknowledging that  
> the question, then, was whetehr Jon would concur, and that he did.
>
> d/
>
> On 1/20/2010 1:18 PM, Bob Braden wrote:
>>
>>
>> internet-history-request at postel.org wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> Does anyone know why .com; .edu and .gov were chosen? I know it  
>>>> seems
>>>> simple, but why .com instead of something like .biz?
>>>
>>
>> I recall seeing those TLD names on Jon's white board at the time. I  
>> feel
>> quite certain that they came out of Jon's head, but were ratified by
>> discussions with Paul.
>>
>> Bob Braden
>>
>>
>
> -- 
>
>  Dave Crocker
>  Brandenburg InternetWorking
>  bbiw.net