From: timk@tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca (Tim Kuehn)
Subject: Reserving a sitename under .ca with a "blanket application"
Organization: TDK Consulting Services
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 21:35:23 GMT

What I would like to see would be a way to reserve a standard 
organization name for all geographic sites under .ca. Then, when 
the time came to bring a "orgname" branch office in a given city 
online, all that would need to be done would be to notify the domain 
comittee of this new site, get an MX forwarder for the site, and tie 
it into the network. Since all co-ordination and admin would be taken 
care of under the umbrella of the parent organization, this (theoretically) 
shouldn't require a new application, but rather an amendment to a 
previously submitted "blanket" application.

For example, an organization has offices Winnepeg Manitoba, and Waterloo
Ontario, among other places. Under a "blanket-application" scheme, when 
each site comes on-line, all that would need to be done would be for the 
central administrator to determine a FQDN based on ISO approved abbreviations 
for the geopolitical area, notify the domain registration committee about 
the new name, and arrange for an MX-forwarder. For these two sites, this 
would yield FQDNs of 

	orgname.winnepeg.mb.ca
	orgname.waterloo.on.ca

By reserving "orgname" over all of Canada, expansion of an organization 
into new geopolitical areas with the area under ".ca" would be consistent 
and easily accomplished, and prevent name-space collissions (and it's 
resulting confusion) between organizational entities.

The reason for this is as follows:

In article <C082x8.GCt@wimsey.bc.ca> sl@wimsey.bc.ca (Stuart Lynne) writes:
>The current approach to use of the US domain is similiar to what the CA-domain
>committee is moving too. Assigning names based on political geography. It is
>implemented a bit differently and possibly a bit more consistently. For example
>it does not appear to allow ibm.us but would require ibm.armonk.ny.us. 

>CA guidelines allow xxx.ca, xxx.prov.ca or xxx.municp.prov.ca depending on
>the size and scope of your business/organization etc.

As I mentioned briefly in "Domain Naming Conventions", I have a client with 
a national prescence over most of Canada, which is also expanding into the 
former USSR and Guatemala, and they're just getting into electronic mail 
via the Internet/USENET. The naming convention that should be used in this 
new expansion is a bit of a puzzle. Which of the following would be best? 

	city[.prov].orgname.ca,
	orgname.city[.prov].ca, or
	city[.prov].country.orgname.org

Since they're already comitted to setting up sites in Lviv and Dnepropetrovsk 
in Ukraina, whatever naming convention is used would needs to be consistent 
over all sites/countries names are applied to. This would lead to the 
conclusion of using the following convention:

	orgname.city[.prov].country 	or
	city[.prov].country.orgname.org

Which leads to

	orgname.city.prov.ca	for Canadian sites, and 
	orgname.city.ua		for Ukranian sites
	orgname.city.gtm 	for Guatemalana sites 

or 
	city.prov.ca.orgname.org 	for Canadian sites, and 
	city.ua.orgname.org 		for Ukranian sites
	city.gtm.orgname.org 		for Guatemalan sites


The conditions as I see it are as follows:

1) Using the orgname.city[.prov].country form 
   - makes more sense 
   - is easier to remember
   - is consistent over all cities, provinces, and countries this 
     organization has or will have a prescence in. 

2) Registering under the .ca domain would requires submitting a domain 
   registration/application for each and every site, with it's attendant 
   cost in fees and time to put the application together.

2) The "associate" offices often as not are run by staff or volunteers 
   who's expertise is *not* with computers or email. Administration 
   work for these "associate" offices *must* be kept to an *absolute* 
   minimum.

3) Having a domain under ".org" should make it easier to deal with all 
   admin, network connections, and forwarding at the central site 
   responsible for the ".orgname.org" domain.

4) There wouldn't be the admin headaches or application fees associated 
   with running an app past a domain  "Czar" or committe each time a new 
   site was added.

5) Using the ".org" would result in having to use a naming convention which 
   is the exact opposite of the convention used under the ".ca" naming 
   convention. Such "counter-to-convention" naming practices should be 
   avoided if at all possible.

While I like the idea of registering the sites under ".ca" in order to get 
a consistent geo-political naming convention, the possibility of having to 
submit an application for each and every site makes me lean more in favor 
of going under ".org", barring an amendable "blanket application" process 
which would greatly facilitate the assignment of domains for trans-canada 
and international organizations.

Comments and criticisms are appreciated.

 +-----------+-----------------------------------+---------------------------+
 | Tim Kuehn | TDK Consulting Services           | timk@tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca |
 | <><       | Ask me about news and mail in KW! | (519)-888-0766            |
 +-----------+-----------------------------------+---------------------------+
Newsgroups: can.domain