It is a cool idea to get your own domain from the Internic.  This is wrong.
That's all I'm trying to get across in this particular rant.  However, you
may be confused as to the precise sense in which I meant that statement.

I meant it on a technical level.  Unnecessary second-level domains (not
top-level domains; that term refers to ".com", for example) impede the
scalability of the domain name system architecture, which deliberately
includes a multilevel, caching, hierarchy of lookups.  Putting new domain
names higher in the hierarchy than necessary will, in the aggregate, defeat
this scaling mechanism, putting stress on the top-level domain server and
the routing bandwidth at the border of its owner's internet.

I meant it on a theoretical level.  There are a limited number of
topological arrangements possible for a distributed database within an
arbitrary map (where in this case the edges of the map represent IP links).
The domain name system needs to be able to give authoritative answers, which
for a variety of reasons (beyond the scope of this discussion) constrains
the topology to be a directed graph (without loops), which basically means
it has to be a tree.  Efficiency of the system for a given lookup then
varies inversely with the length of the traversal.  Caching does *not*
significantly sidestep this problem, because the smaller the subtree
(domain), the less likely it is to be cached at a given level.  [Much less
likely, in fact: in a simple stochastic model, it's roughly exponential.]

I meant it on a moral level.  It's true that adding your particular domain
name will not bring the DNS to its knees.  However, multiplied by hundreds
of thousands of second-level domains, the problem is becoming significant.
Contributing to the problem is something that, as good citizens, we should
not do.  The fact that lots of other people are doing it does not make it
right.  It may be "legal," but that doesn't make it right either.

So what are the alternatives?  Well, regional hierarchies, for one.  In many
countries, this may be your only real alternative; in the U.S. (as I am),
it's not commonly used.  Regional hierarchies aren't even appropriate in all
cases (multinational corporations being the most obvious example), but
regional domains should be used where possible.  Another alternative is to
get someone else to delegate a piece of their domain to you.

It's ridiculous, for example, for the YMCA of Metropolitan Atlanta, Inc., to
have its own 'ymcaatl.org' domain.  Instead, they could have a subdomain of
'atlanta.ga.us' or 'ymca.org'.  [After all, it's not like they're going to
leave Atlanta.  Or stop being a YMCA.  And if they did either one, they'd
want to change their domain name anyway.]

I'm aware that to some, this commentary will come off as anal-retentive
pedantry, but this stuff actually matters.  It's easy to look at the
proliferation of second-level domains (well over a million already) and make
the assumption that, as I once heard it put, "that is the way the net is run
these days."  Indeed, one domain really doesn't make any significant
difference in this respect.  But multiplied by all the second-level domains
on the 'net, the difference is quite substantial.  I'm sure you've noticed
Domain Name System queries taking longer lately...

Be well.
        Lowell