In message <20021202205024.U94626-100000@voo.doo.net>, Marc Schneiders writes: > >Which would have the same result as what you predict for a few hundred >extra TLDs. The solution to the whole problem is of course to replace >DNS by something better. I've heard more than a few times in the past, >that it will be replaced by other functions/schemes/directories. Not >that I am aware of any that seems to qualify for all the functions so >far. Still, it would be quite on topic, if I may say so, to discuss >what we should develop to do a better job. Obsolete it, if you cannot >reform it? > > I think that a requirements document for that would be entirely in order. I suspect that no one system will be able to fulfill all requirements. --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me) http://www.wilyhacker.com ("Firewalls" book)