Duncan Rogerson <D.Rogerson@nosc.ja.net> writes * > handle: XXXXYYY@ncc.ripe.net * .. * > etc.? Or, if that might confuse NIC handles with email addresses, * > replacing the @ with another character? * * I think having something that looks like an e-mail address is * a bad idea, it's too confusing. * * Given that one of the aims of handles is (I think !) a more * compact, shorthand form of referring to someone, the RIPE-DR222 * idea sounds better to me - DR222@rs.internic.net is longer than * my real name ! I have to agree here. I think a nice syntax would be: <NIC>-XXXYYY where it is probably is too much hastle to ask InterNIC to redo all their nic-hdls to have INTERNIC-XXXYYY, so they probably keep the handles without the NIC. The others could be: RIPE-MT2 APNIC-MT2 ... Question is, to what level do we go down for the NIC ? Should we go down to DENIC-MT2 JANET-MT2 I don;t think so. My sense of NIC for the handles should be the highest level IP number authorities in the area .... (ie continents) Just another opinion, -Marten