Will all domain be worth at least something?

[Giant]

Originally Posted by Rubber Duck

...
Are IP addresses going to become the latest market for speculation?

The answer is a simple NO.

IPV6 is coming...

[Giant]

Originally Posted by jacksonm

The registries do not hold IP addresses for domains. They hold IP addresses of a domain's nameservers - the nameservers that you set for a domain through your registrar control panel. You simply tell the registry that you want the nameservers for fiddle.com to be ns1.fastpark.net and ns2.fastpark.net, or ns1.netauth.com and ns3.netauth.com.

Domains are not allocated an IP address by the registry. Domains are allocated IP addresses by the person who is managing the DNS servers which you entered above. There is no built-in and inseparable IP address belong to a domain. A domain is nothing more than a name with it's list of nameservers entered into the registry.
.

Wrong!

When you reg a domain, you are required to fill in name servers. Don't argue that name servers are not addresses.

If you ask the UK Prime Minister where does he live, he would answer "Prime Minister's residence". "Prime Minister's residence" here is exactly an address --- 10 Downing street.

[jacksonm]

While I will get into a technical discussion with Dave, who is an engineer that speaks the same language as I, I won't get into one with you as there are three barriers - your ego, your lack of technical understanding, and your grasp of English. I could take the patience to overcome the grasp of English and potentially even the technical understanding were the ego not in place.

Dave understood the point and admitted that his initial presumption was incorrect. No big deal, nothing wrong with that. The question that could IP addresses become speculation targets was also worthy of a response, IMO. I do not post just to prove people wrong - If I wasn't interested in helping somebody to understand the topic then I wouldn't even bother.

.

[Giant]

Originally Posted by jacksonm

While I will get into a technical discussion with Dave, who is an engineer that speaks the same language as I, I won't get into one with you as there are three barriers - your ego, your lack of technical understanding, and your grasp of English. I could take the patience to overcome the grasp of English and potentially even the technical understanding were the ego not in place.

Dave understood the point and admitted that his initial presumption was incorrect. No big deal, nothing wrong with that. The question that could IP addresses become speculation targets was also worthy of a response, IMO. I do not post just to prove people wrong - If I wasn't interested in helping somebody to understand the topic then I wouldn't even bother.

.

You do not post to prove people wrong? You are here to help Dave? That's why I call you a funny guy, a real funny guy!

But I just want to tell you this, you are just a newbie.

The lesson I want to offer you today is: Name Servers are also addresses. Just like a prime minister's residence, it can function as an office and it can accommodate many people but first of all it's an address.

[Rubber Duck]

Originally Posted by mulligan

Did anyone ever call you looking for the dead person? ..

It was an oasis town so everyone knew everyone elses business, and if they did it would have been Arabic and we probably wouldn't have understood anything, but yes probably once or twice.

[Rubber Duck]

Originally Posted by jacksonm

Migration to IPv6 has been slow because most North American companies don't give a rat's arse - they already have far more allocated to them than they could ever possibly use and they won't return any of them. Screw the rest of the world. Countries like China and India will eventually be forced into putting IPv4 <-> IPv6 translating gateways at all of their borders and just use IPv6 internally. Which won't really be a problem - if handset manufacturers don't deliver phones with IPv6 stacks, then those countries will just stop importing them and begin making their own (more than they already do, anyway).

.

Yes, this is what I am picking up on.

I guess all that will happen is that the Chinese will leap ahead and the Americans will end up happy but isolated in technologically obscelete ghetto.

[Rubber Duck]

Originally Posted by Giant

Wrong!

When you reg a domain, you are required to fill in name servers. Don't argue that name servers are not addresses.

If you ask the UK Prime Minister where does he live, he would answer "Prime Minister's residence". "Prime Minister's residence" here is exactly an address --- 10 Downing street.

Yes, but I genuinely misunderstood. I mistakenly thought there was a one to one relationship between IPs and domains, but it seems that the system is rather more complicated than that. Mind you there is little indication the current system is in anyway optimal, so who knows what the situation will be in the future, but for IPv4 the answer to how it works is clearly, "Well, not like that!"

[Rubber Duck]

Originally Posted by jacksonm

While I will get into a technical discussion with Dave, who is an engineer that speaks the same language as I, I won't get into one with you as there are three barriers - your ego, your lack of technical understanding, and your grasp of English. I could take the patience to overcome the grasp of English and potentially even the technical understanding were the ego not in place.

.

I don't believe this is really valid. Giant is probably more technically aware than I am. Engineer I might be, but bridges and computers are two different animals. I am a User turned Domain Speculator. Nothing more.

[Giant]

Originally Posted by Rubber Duck

Giant is probably more technically aware than I am....

I started my computer science major in 1976, and I retired from the technical world in 1998. Life is much better if you don't have to work with computers....

[Giant]

Originally Posted by Rubber Duck

Yes, but I genuinely misunderstood. I mistakenly thought there was a one to one relationship between IPs and domains, but it seems that the system is rather more complicated than that. Mind you there is little indication the current system is in anyway optimal, so who knows what the situation will be in the future, but for IPv4 the answer to how it works is clearly, "Well, not like that!"

Dave I knew you misunderstood the relationship between IPs and domains, nevertheless what you tried to say is still completely correct --- the more domains we use, the more IP address we need.

Let me use my real life examples to show why.

I need to set up 3 websites (site1.com, site2.com, site3.com) for my clients in China.

I use name servers ns1.site1.com and ns2.site1.com for site1.com
I use name servers ns1.site2.com and ns2.site2.com for site2.com
I use name servers ns1.site3.com and ns2.site3.com for site3.com

3 sites, I need at least 6 IPs or more. And if I have to build one more site, then I need 8 IPs.... These are just the minimum number of IPs to let my sites be reachable.

The reason I don't use the same name servers for all these sites is simple. I try to make it hard for China to block all my sites in case they don't like any one of my sites.

The argument that we can use the same name servers for 500 parking sites with the same IPs and therefore we don't need more IPs is not convincing and not practical.

Parking sites is a special case, the domain name system is not intended for parking domains.

It would be very unwise to ask IBM, Microsoft, Google... to use the same name servers.

I have hired technical people for my work for many years, I haven't seen any of them brag in front of me that they know what a name server is :-). I hire experts, not newbies.