Re: fwd: Re: [registrars] Re: panix.com hijacked

[Joe Maimon <jmaimon () ttec com>]

Andrew Brown wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 16, 2005 at 07:21:55PM +0100, Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
>  
>
> > On 16.01 12:46, William Allen Simpson wrote:
> >    
> >
> > > > ------- Forwarded Message
> > > >
> > > > From: "Ross Wm. Rader" <ross () tucows com>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I don't see what you are looking at - .net and .com point to the same 
> > > > place with no indication of anything awry...of course, I'm late to the 
> > > > game and the DNS probably tells a different story...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >        
> > > This fellow is pretty confused, as from here (Michigan via Merit) the
> > > DNS has pointed to different places since yesterday.
> > >      
> > A quick survey of some caching servers in my neighborhood reveals that
> > some of them return "old/correct" A RRs for panix.com at this time. 
> >    
>
> presumably they have cached ns records from before the switch in the
> com tld zone.
>
>  
Thus justifying those who load their NS and corresponding NS's A records 
with nice long TTL

At least those whose caches' your still in will still talk to you after 
your registrar screws you.

(OT
Limiting named cache size could have an adverse effect for people hoping 
to cash into this inusurance. Shouldnt cache limiting kill low priority 
records such as A's which do not correspond to cached NS first....
)