Chris Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
It is because, if someone reports (by telephone, IRC or IRL) that he
sent an email and I did not receive it, I regard as VERY IMPORTANT to
be able to check the spam folder (with a search tool, not by hand) and
go back to him saying "No, we really did not rece
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jay R. Ashworth
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
Could someone, anyone, anywhere, point me to *any case law in any
jurisdiction whatsoever* which tends even to *suggest* that the mere
purchase and deployment of a domain name *in itself* in any way
constitutes infringemen
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jay R. Ashworth
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
The Domain Name System is not now, and never has been, away to *find*
things, anymore than 123 Elm St, Worcester MA is a way to *find* a
house.
What about "1 Microsoft Way, Redmond, WA" ?
--
Roland Perry
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 07:19:45PM +0100, Tony Finch wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jun 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > one might legitimately argue that ICANN is in need of
> > some serious regulation
> >
> > that can happen at that national level or on the international
> > level.
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 06:36:06PM +0100,
Tony Finch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
a message of 15 lines which said:
> It makes the "public suffix list" project harder, but so long as the
> list of TLDs changes reasonably slowly, it shouldn't become
> impossible. http://publicsuffix.org/
Well, th
On Jun 30, 2008, at 10:43 PM, James Hess wrote:
Sure, nefarious use of say .local could cause a few problems but
this is
I'd be more concerned about nefarious use of a TLD like ".DLL",
".EXE", ".TXT"
Or other domains that look like filenames.
Like .INFO, .PL, .SH, and, of course, .COM?
On Jul 1, 2008, at 1:43 AM, James Hess wrote:
I'm still having a hard time seeing what everyone is getting worked
up about.
Maybe it's not that bad. The eventual result is instead of having a
billion .COM SLDs, there are a billion TLDs: all eggs in one basket,
There is the question of t
[ back on list ]
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 05:34:53PM -0400, Jerry B. Altzman wrote:
> There was a HUGE one about that domain name between Nissan Motors and
> some computer consultant named Nissan (a Hebrew name) in NC.
> vis http://www.nissan.com/Lawsuit/The_Story.php
> I don't know exactly how to
> > vis http://www.nissan.com/Lawsuit/The_Story.php
>
> Yeah, I vaguely remembered it after you mentioned it.
>
> A quick look at the website would imply that he won, which rather makes
> my point, no? :-)
No. He hasn't won. He's out a large amount of money defending against
this, AND Nissan
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 08:40:15PM -0500, Joe Greco wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 08:46:33AM -0500, Joe Greco wrote:
> > > Yes. It completely marginalizes the remaining positive qualities of the
> > > Domain Name System as a way to find things, in the name of giving people
> > > "more options
On Tue, Jul 01, 2008 at 04:01:34AM -, Martin Hannigan wrote:
> > Doesn't ICANN already work like an international regulator?
>
> No. They are more like the IETF than the ITU, but not quite the IETF.
> It's hard to describe. The origins are Berkman Center for Internet
> and Soceity at Harvard,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jul 1, 2008, at 4:54 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
Chris Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
I did not write this FYI.
It is because, if someone reports (by telephone, IRC or IRL) that he
sent an email and I did not receive it, I regard as VERY IMPORTA
Maybe it's not that bad. The eventual result is instead of having
a billion .COM SLDs, there are a billion TLDs: all eggs in one
There are simply not going to me billions, millions, or even probably
tens of thousands of TLDs as a result of this. It's still a complex
several months long adm
> People keep making the assertion that top-level domains that
> have the same strings as popular file extensions will be a
> 'security disaster', but I've yet to see an explanation of
> the potential exploits. I could maybe see a problem with
> ".LOCAL" due to mdns or llmnr or ".1" due to the
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 07:55:07AM -0700, Roger Marquis wrote:
> Backscatter / NDNs are another issue. In practice they are no longer
> feasible without assurance that the sender is both valid and legitimate.
> Bounces without these validations are usually spam and will get your server
> blacklist
On Tue, 1 Jul 2008, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 06:36:06PM +0100,
> Tony Finch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> a message of 15 lines which said:
>
> > It makes the "public suffix list" project harder, but so long as the
> > list of TLDs changes reasonably slowly, it shouldn't
On Tue, 1 Jul 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 07:19:45PM +0100, Tony Finch wrote:
> > On Sun, 29 Jun 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > one might legitimately argue that ICANN is in need of some serious
> > > regulation that can happen at that national level or
Phil Regnauld (regnauld) writes:
> John Levine (johnl) writes:
> > d) 280
>
> # dig @f.root-servers.net axfr . | egrep 'IN[[:space:]]NS' | awk '{ print $1
> }' | sort -u |wc -l
>
> 281
Interesting extract from a transcript of tICANN board meeting in Paris.
It doesn't say much about what wa
Once again, I am baffled that people would rather speculate than do
five minutes of reading. (Well, maybe baffled isn't the word.)
>There is the question of the fee structure. If the fee is really > $
>100,000 USD, then this will damp down the numbers considerably.
The fee isn't set, but I hav
On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 09:32:00 EDT, Marshall Eubanks said:
> How many .com domains are there ? I have a _2001_ report of 19
> million. I would guess maybe 50 million by now.
The last numbers I saw was 140M .coms. However, due to the incredible
amount of churn due to domain-tasting by spammers, 5
here's how it looks just before i hit the "catch up" button.
[ 23: [EMAIL PROTECTED] nanog.org mailing list memberships reminder
[ 90: "James Hess"] Re: DNS and potential energy
< 155: Marshall Eubanks>
[ 22: John Levine ]
< 35: "Jay R. Ashw
Rob Pickering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Or .com. Oddly enough I just now found a Windows box and typed
> "command.com" in a browser URL bar and it did what I expected, when I
> typed the same thing at a cmd prompt it did something different and I
> expected that too.
1. Copy \windows\syste
On Tue, 1 Jul 2008, David Conrad wrote:
>
> I could maybe see a problem with ".LOCAL" due to mdns or llmnr or ".1"
> due to the risk of someone registering "127.0.0.1"
RFC 1123 section 2.1 says TLDs can't be purely numeric.
Tony.
--
f.anthony.n.finch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/
BISCAY
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 06:47:30PM +0100, Tony Finch wrote:
> >
> > Trailing dots in email addresses are a syntax error.
>
> In fact, Mutt (1.2.5) permits the trailing dot, and delivers the mail,
> and all the intervening MTAs (I only tested local mail
On Tue, Jul 01, 2008 at 12:43:54AM -0500, James Hess wrote:
> Maybe it's not that bad. The eventual result is instead of having a
> billion .COM SLDs, there are a billion TLDs:
No, no, no, no, no.
A billion people don't have half-a-mil each to set up TLD registries.
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R.
On Tue, Jul 01, 2008 at 06:08:43AM -0700, David Conrad wrote:
> >Seeing as a certain popular operating system confounds local file
> >access via
> >Explorer with internet access...
>
> I gather you're implying MS Windows does this?
Start->Run.
Type in the full filename of a binary on your path
On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 13:13:31 EDT, "Jay R. Ashworth" said:
> On Tue, Jul 01, 2008 at 12:43:54AM -0500, James Hess wrote:
> > Maybe it's not that bad. The eventual result is instead of having a
> > billion .COM SLDs, there are a billion TLDs:
>
> No, no, no, no, no.
>
> A billion people don't ha
On Tue, Jul 01, 2008 at 12:04:57PM +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jay R. Ashworth
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
> >The Domain Name System is not now, and never has been, away to *find*
> >things, anymore than 123 Elm St, Worcester MA is a way to *find* a
> >house.
>
>
Any AT&T engineers willing to help me out? I'm seeing some significant
packet loss but only when using our AT&T circuit.
(USING AT&T)
Source: 67.192.51.58
Destination: 24.73.68.114
traceroute to 24.73.68.114 (24.73.68.114), 30 hops max, 46 byte packets
1 72.3.242.2 (72.3.242.2) 0.569 ms 0.
Shouldn't we take all the ICANNt and DNS Related stuff to
dns-operations?
-Original Message-
From: Jay R. Ashworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 11:48 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens
upPandora's Box of
On T
> Subject: RE: what problem are we solving? (was Re: ICANN opens
upPandora's Box of
> Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 12:25:38 -0700
> From: "Tomas L. Byrnes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Jay R. Ashworth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>
> Shouldn't we take all the ICANNt and DNS Related stuff to
> dns-operation
Tony Finch wrote:
So you say the solution for bad regulation is more regulation.
Been the liberal-socialist mantra for eons.
--
Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics
of System Administrators:
Ex turpi causa non orit
Paul Vixie wrote:
here's how it looks just before i hit the "catch up" button.
Damn! All that operational stuff on NANOG. Whodathunkit?!
Chris Owen wrote:
The lack of a spam folder is one of the problems with such a solution.
Having a middle ground quarantine is actually quite nice.
However, the biggest problem is these solutions are global in nature.
We let individual customers considerable control over the process. They
c
Hello.
Anyone have a suggestion or recommendation on a vendor for some cheap, but
reliable, SDH gear? I don't need anything as powerful as the Ciena Core or
Cisco 15454 and I'm wondering if there are alternatives to the alternatives?
I need something to aggregate STM-4 and above to STM-64 client s
David Conrad wrote:
> People keep making the assertion that top-level domains that have the
> same strings as popular file extensions will be a 'security disaster'
Microsoft, in its infinite wisdom and desire to not abide by standards
it has not set decided that instead of relying on the Mime
One candidate offering small and/or reasonable prices is:
www.mrv.com
Yardiel
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 5:28 PM, Kerplunkity Moo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Anyone have a suggestion or recommendation on a vendor for some cheap, but
> reliable, SDH gear? I don't need anything as powerful
Even if they are decrementing TTL inside of their MPLS core, the TTL
expired message still has to traverse the entire MPLS LSP (tunnel), so
the latency reported for each "hop" is in fact the latency of the last
hop in the MPLS network. Always.
Sam
Robert Richardson wrote:
They probably don't
Right, but aren't they only WDM?
Best,
Marty
On 7/1/08, Yardiel Fuentes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One candidate offering small and/or reasonable prices is:
>
> www.mrv.com
>
> Yardiel
>
> On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 5:28 PM, Kerplunkity Moo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> Hello.
>>
>> Anyone h
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sam Stickland wrote:
| Even if they are decrementing TTL inside of their MPLS core, the TTL
| expired message still has to traverse the entire MPLS LSP (tunnel), so
| the latency reported for each "hop" is in fact the latency of the last
| hop in the
40 matches
Mail list logo
