(Choosing DNS-operations.) On 3/13/15, 18:21, "Darcy Kevin (FCA)" <kevin.da...@fcagroup.com> wrote:
>IANAL, but I think this might have legal ramifications. If they are >advertising/selling "DNS" services and what they are delivering is not >"DNS", then Truth in Advertising and/or Bait-and-Switch statutes, >regulations and/or treaty provisions may apply. ... Having worked in the same market - that point won't win any arguments. Whether you are substantively right or not, it won't win any arguments. Why? There is a class of customers that don't take the time to know what "compliant DNS" is. There is a class of customers with engineering staffs that prefer the vendor be non-standard for their own sake. There is a class of customers that don't care as much about standards but more about whether they can switch to someone else. I've never seen a case of a customer that claimed the service was deficient because it was counter to a standard or RFC. I have seen the reverse, a customer getting mad because a service was brought in line with specifications, I've had to roll back to non-standard behavior. This may be an unfair response because sometimes non-standard behavior is considered a bug and remedied.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ dns-operations mailing list dns-operations@lists.dns-oarc.net https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations dns-jobs mailing list https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-jobs
