[ih] Naming and addressing

[John Day]

So did the allocation plan for CLNP addresses in the US.

Turned out that some other part of ANSI had defined a unique company 
code for all US companies I forget what was called.  Had nothing to 
do with networking.

Anyone who wanted a set of CLNP addresses was suppose to get one of 
these codes, it was then the next level of the hierarchy after 
country code.  The rest of the address was theirs to deal with as 
they liked.

I remember reading an article in Network World probably in the late 
80s about addressing and the author after describing the process for 
getting IP addresses, said he was unable to figure out who one 
applied to to get CLNP addresses.  Of course, the answer was no one!

Take care,
John

At 9:20 -0700 2010/03/31, Dave Crocker wrote:
>On 3/31/2010 8:16 AM, Elizabeth Feinler wrote:
>>>Also a quick question folks have been asking me -- when did we have country
>>>code TLDs and when did we decide to use the ISO list?   I think we 
>>>had ccTLDs
>>>by late 1985 as .UK was active and Jon P. had assigned .US to himself (at
>>>least, that's what I remember).  But I think choosing a list of 
>>>ccTLDs blessed
>>>by ISO was done a bit later.  Yes?
>>
>>I will punt this one to Paul M. or Joyce Reynolds.  ISO decreed 
>>that international standards had jurisdiction down to the 
>>country-level TLD, and from there the naming scheme was up to the 
>>country itself.  It was at that time that Jon applied for the .us 
>>domain, as I remember it.  This was a parallel effort with us at 
>>the time, and I do not recall the exact time frame.
>
>
>I don't recall discussing this with Jon or other DNS folk directly, 
>but the story I heard was:
>
>Jon watched the political challenges in 'country' naming and decided 
>to invoke a model that already had some popularity in 
>Arpanet/Internet design:  specify a framework, and defer the 
>fine-grained details to a group that focusses on them.
>
>In this case, that mean specifying use of the ISO table and thereby 
>deferring definition of the table's contents to ISO.
>
>(Other examples of this model include MIME, with Content-type, and 
>email addresses do this, by deferring the details of mailboxes to 
>the host/organization that owns them.  For email addresses, this is 
>in contrast with the way X.400 specified addresses.  So the model of 
>framework-and-defer really is noteworthy.)
>
>d/
>--
>
>   Dave Crocker
>   Brandenburg InternetWorking
>   bbiw.net