Re: Pushing GTLD zones [WAS: Akamai DNS Issue?]

[Jeroen Massar <jeroen () unfix org>]

On Thu, 2004-06-17 at 20:00, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > >   think stability.
> >
> > I think recent events prove pretty well that Verisign GRS no longer gives
> > a crap about stability.  Have we forgotten *.COM so quickly?
>
> oh please.  i was an publically critical of *.COM and *.NET, but that's a
> policy problem, not an operational problem.  verisign has a very good
> record for name server uptime, both at the TLD and root level.  if you're
> going to complain about their wildcard policies, please be specific.

Enough has been said about that, though a concrete list of the cons have
never been published (pointers anyone?). The biggest con is simply that
.com becomes a normal domain and not a zone which only contains NS
records making every domain just a subzone (technically that is it
indeed) of the .com. If Verisign wants to own every domain in the .com
zone they should register every one of them seperatly and pay the
registration fees to one of the other registrars. It also breaks normal
operational usage and the year old assumptions that people can make of
it.

> (note that verisign has amended their complaint against icann (since the
> court dismissed the first one) and i'm now named as a co-conspirator.  if
> you reply to this message, there's a good chance of your e-mail appearing
> in court filings at some point.)

For that matter I think (and hope) that most people on NANOG will be
delighted to stand at your side against this Verisign madness.

Greets,
 Jeroen

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part