nanog mailing list archives
RE: more on VeriSign to revive redirect service
From: "McBurnett, Jim" <jmcburnett () msmgmt com>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 09:31:21 -0400
All, I hate to agree but he is right. With companies like godaddy out there. Does it make sense to pay Verislime money to fund sitefinder and our headaches? To change this: what else can we do to prevent this? Does the last BIND version truly break sitefinder? Later, Jim ->-----Original Message----- ->From: Miles Fidelman [mailto:mfidelman () civicnet org] ->Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 9:24 AM ->To: nanog list ->Subject: Re: more on VeriSign to revive redirect service -> -> -> ->Just out of curiousity, I wonder how many domain ->registrations those of us ->on nanog represent? Contract sanctions from ICANN are one ->thing, taking ->all of our business elsewhere might also be effective at ->getting a point ->across (though it might also backfire - pushing Verisign to ->be even more ->agressive at taking advantage of their positioning). -> ->Miles -> ->
Current thread:
- Re: more on VeriSign to revive redirect service, (continued)
- Re: more on VeriSign to revive redirect service Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 18)
- Re: more on VeriSign to revive redirect service Chris Lewis (Oct 18)
- more on VeriSign to revive redirect service David Lesher (Oct 18)
- Re: more on VeriSign to revive redirect service Miles Fidelman (Oct 18)
- Re: more on VeriSign to revive redirect service Christopher X. Candreva (Oct 18)
- Re: more on VeriSign to revive redirect service Mike Lewinski (Oct 18)
- Re: more on VeriSign to revive redirect service Ray Bellis (Oct 18)
- Re: more on VeriSign to revive redirect service William Allen Simpson (Oct 18)
- RE: more on VeriSign to revive redirect service Kevin Bednar (Oct 18)
- Re: more on VeriSign to revive redirect service Miles Fidelman (Oct 18)
- RE: more on VeriSign to revive redirect service Owen DeLong (Oct 18)
- RE: more on VeriSign to revive redirect service Jeff Shultz (Oct 18)