Open Letter to all NZ ISPs and users of NZNOG

T McC

16 Jun 2001 16 Jun '01

2:23 p.m.

Please find attached an Open Letter to all ISPs in New Zealand and all users of NZNOG. This is in no way to be treated as SPAM. It is in response to the many misconceptions and uninformed comments made by ISPs in New Zealand and users of NZNOG as a result of the email I sent to ISPs in New Zealand asking them to adjust their server settings to accept access to the .z extension. Please read it and if any one has any comments or requires any further information please contact me. Yours Trevarr McCarthy President The Wapterix Internet Group -- _______________________________________________ FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup Make PC-to-Phone calls with Net2Phone. Sign-up today at: http://www.net2phone.com/cgi-bin/link.cgi?121 -- _______________________________________________ FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup Make PC-to-Phone calls with Net2Phone. Sign-up today at: http://www.net2phone.com/cgi-bin/link.cgi?121

Attachments:

OpenLetter17June2001.doc (application/msword — 70.5 KB)

Show replies by date

Peter Mott

16 Jun 16 Jun

2:49 p.m.

...

Please find attached an Open Letter to all ISPs in New Zealand and all users of NZNOG.

Its a non standard document format. Many people here don't have Windows on their desktop, let alone MS word.

...

This is in no way to be treated as SPAM.

I think you will find its up to the recipient to decide whether a message is unwanted. Whilst others here used the word SPAM, we considered it to be UCE - unsolicited commercial email from a not particularly saavy company. I have read your 'open letter' and find no new information to suggest my initial assessment was incorrect. Peter Mott Chief Enthusiast 2day.com -/- --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Juha Saarinen

2:53 p.m.

Well, I could be wrong, but this looks awfully like a spammer whining. -- Regards, Juha PGP fingerprint: B7E1 CC52 5FCA 9756 B502 10C8 4CD8 B066 12F3 9544 On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, T McC wrote:

...

Please find attached an Open Letter to all ISPs in New Zealand and all users of NZNOG.

This is in no way to be treated as SPAM. It is in response to the many misconceptions and uninformed comments made by ISPs in New Zealand and users of NZNOG as a result of the email I sent to ISPs in New Zealand asking them to adjust their server settings to accept access to the .z extension.

Please read it and if any one has any comments or requires any further information please contact me.

Yours

Trevarr McCarthy President The Wapterix Internet Group

--------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Chris Rigby

3:28 p.m.

...

Well, I could be wrong, but this looks awfully like a spammer whining.

It certainly does. _And_ he had the audacity to suggest Matt _wasn't_ God. Quite frankly If I read it right he's basically saying "All NZ ISP's should change over to this alternate DNS system because we have some domains registered under it". Quite frankly I don't see why we should all go to the hassle and work when it's only going to benefit one person and inconvenience many. "The good of the many..." Chris Rigby Senior Systems Engineer IHUG - Into the Internet --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

James Tyson

17 Jun 17 Jun

5:47 a.m.

...

...
Well, I could be wrong, but this looks awfully like a spammer whining.

It certainly does. _And_ he had the audacity to suggest Matt _wasn't_ God.

Quite frankly If I read it right he's basically saying "All NZ ISP's should change over to this alternate DNS system because we have some domains registered under it".

Quite frankly I don't see why we should all go to the hassle and work when it's only going to benefit one person and inconvenience many.

I am personally quite happy to break the name-servers under my control upon reciept of a contract stating that Wapterix will pay me 2c/query licensing fee for single handedly enabling their business plan. I still don't understand how people can build business models around the "get someone to give me something for free and sell it to other people" approach. Cheers. James Tyson --- Samizdat New Media Solutions --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Lin Nah

16 Jun 16 Jun

3:41 p.m.

On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, Juha Saarinen wrote:

...

Well, I could be wrong, but this looks awfully like a spammer whining. looks like a duck quacks like a duck ...

If he is such an expert on the internet, he should perhaps know that word isn't lingua franca where email is concerned. He should have stuck to plain vanilla text. Lin --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Keith Davidson

3:30 p.m.

New subject: Open Letter to Trevarr McCarthy

I have discovered that things that waddle and quack usually are ducks. Likewise, spam is usually spam. Regarding the Internet, the only things worse than spam are whining spams, and the only thing worse than whining spams are whining spams attached in some proprietary software format. Please go away, and do not infiltrate my mailbox in future. Keith Davidson Trevarr McCarthy stated:

...

Please find attached an Open Letter to all ISPs in New Zealand and all users of NZNOG.

This is in no way to be treated as SPAM. It is in response to the many misconceptions and uninformed comments made by ISPs in New Zealand and users of NZNOG as a result of the email I sent to ISPs in New Zealand asking them to adjust their server settings to accept access to the .z extension.

Please read it and if any one has any comments or requires any further information please contact me.

--------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Matthias Dallmeier

3:38 p.m.

I assume you chose to attach your "open" letter in Word format instead of posting an URL to an HTML document because you realized that those .z domain names you registered are currently even more worthless than Microsoft "standards" to most people. If you are serious about your business and not just on a mission to fight the evil that is Domainz, I suggest you consider getting a "real" domain name and stop wasting your time with this .z thing. There is simply no way you will be able to convert all Internet users in New Zealand to use it anytime soon. And if you think you can limit your audience to the few people you might be able to persuade, your business is already doomed from the start. -- Matthias On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, T McC wrote:

...

Please find attached an Open Letter to all ISPs in New Zealand and all users of NZNOG.

This is in no way to be treated as SPAM. It is in response to the many misconceptions and uninformed comments made by ISPs in New Zealand and users of NZNOG as a result of the email I sent to ISPs in New Zealand asking them to adjust their server settings to accept access to the .z extension.

Please read it and if any one has any comments or requires any further information please contact me.

Yours

Trevarr McCarthy President The Wapterix Internet Group

--------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Mark Goldfinch

6:01 p.m.

Trevarr, On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, T McC wrote:

...

Please find attached an Open Letter to all ISPs in New Zealand and all users of NZNOG.

This is in no way to be treated as SPAM. It is in response to the many misconceptions and uninformed comments made by ISPs in New Zealand and users of NZNOG as a result of the email I sent to ISPs in New Zealand asking them to adjust their server settings to accept access to the .z extension.

Please read it and if any one has any comments or requires any further information please contact me.

I'm sorry Trevarr but your "Open Letter" only emphasises what I had concluded previously. There are very strong technical reasons why alternative roots are a very bad idea. You have not provided any information to the contrary. Are you aware of who you're making comments about here? These people are responsible for ensuring that the Internet in New Zealand is working. These people understand DNS down to the bits sent over the wire. To say that these people's opinions are uninformed could be seen as an insult. I do not have a problem with your broadcasting my reply to your email, but are you sure that others will have the same opinion? If your message was a business letter and not spam, how about you bother running the spell and grammar checker next time? --- Mark Goldfinch Network Engineer Paradise Net Internet Services TelstraSaturn Ltd. --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Pete

17 Jun 17 Jun

5:05 a.m.

...

There are very strong technical reasons why alternative roots are a very bad idea. You have not provided any information to the contrary.

Fair call, Mark. I have my 2c on the side to throw in also: I believe its the clients choice wether they resolve their DNS through the usual channels (ie via the ISP's DNS server), or direct to an alternative root DNS server. And so it is, I am not aware of any ISP blocking lookups via servers outside their LAN. However, what gets me is all these transparent web-caches that due to their nature fail to proxy web-requests to alternative TLD sites. I'm not asking that ISPs change their primary DNS servers to do lookups on alternate servers. I just ask that that should I choose to do so then their web-cache engines proxy the pages correctly. For instance, if I dial into Tasman Solutions (local Nelson ISP) and set my DNS resolver to an alternative server, I can connect to the web-page "www.pacroot" (as they have no transparent cache). But if I dial into Paradise.NET and set my DNS resolver to an alternate server, I cannot access the web-page "www.pacroot" as the transparent web-cache at Paradise steps in and tells me "The system encountered an Unresolvable Host Name while attempting to retrieve http://www.pacroot/.". :( I've asked Paradise.NET to key alternate root DNS server IP's into their Cache-Flows, and they've told me to go jump. Fair enough, its their call. It's just a shame that I have to vote with my feet. I guess what I am getting to - as an end user - is that its the ISP's choice if they want to resolve non-ICANN TLDs, but even if they don't, should they really be "blocking" them via their web-caches? Thanks for listening :) Pete. Pete Mundy - Technician Advanced Communications +64-3-546-9169 / +64-25-480-840 E-Mail: Pete(a)AdvComm.Co.NZ --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Andy Gardner

5:11 a.m.

At 10:05 am +1200 6/18/01, Pete wrote:

...

I guess what I am getting to - as an end user - is that its the ISP's choice if they want to resolve non-ICANN TLDs, but even if they don't, should they really be "blocking" them via their web-caches?

They won't have a choice soon. IIRC, if they use anything but the "approved" root, ICANN will tell APNIC to re-assign the ISP's IP allotment. -- Andrew P. Gardner barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP? We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare? Get active: http://www.tldlobby.com --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

!Dr. Joe Baptista

4:17 a.m.

On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, Andy Gardner wrote:

...

IIRC, if they use anything but the "approved" root, ICANN will tell APNIC to re-assign the ISP's IP allotment.

remember - all that APNIC, ARIN and RIPE do is maintain a database of ip assignments. If ICANN becomes a problem and wants to play hitler - all it takes is ISP's to agree to change to another provider. The existing database managers can be replaced by popular consensus - so i would not be overly concerned - just ready. regards joe baptista The dot.GOD Registry, Limited The Executive Plaza, Suite 908 150 West 51st Street Tel: 1 (208) 330-4173 Manhattan Island NYC 10019 USA Fax: 1 (208) 293-9773 --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Jeff Williams

9 a.m.

Joe and all, Although Andy is correct and APNIC announced this some two to three weeks ago now yet removed the link, as did ICANN three days after this announcement was posted on Apnic-Talk ML as well as any associated links to it, Joe is also correct in his evaluation of how to handle this potential damaging aspect. It should also be known that there are "Rumors" of new IP registries being created, to address this situation or future similar situations that the ICANN BoD may decide to engage in in the mid to long term. Some of these new IP registry have already received commitments for substantial funding. I wish I could be more specific on this, but until I have more solid information I cannot. We are working on this though.... !Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:

...

On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, Andy Gardner wrote:

...
IIRC, if they use anything but the "approved" root, ICANN will tell APNIC to re-assign the ISP's IP allotment.

remember - all that APNIC, ARIN and RIPE do is maintain a database of ip assignments. If ICANN becomes a problem and wants to play hitler - all it takes is ISP's to agree to change to another provider. The existing database managers can be replaced by popular consensus - so i would not be overly concerned - just ready.

regards joe baptista

The dot.GOD Registry, Limited The Executive Plaza, Suite 908 150 West 51st Street Tel: 1 (208) 330-4173 Manhattan Island NYC 10019 USA Fax: 1 (208) 293-9773

--------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Regards, -- Jeffrey A. Williams Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!) CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng. Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC. E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com Contact Number: 972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827 Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208 --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

!Dr. Joe Baptista

4:46 a.m.

sorry about that Jeff - i did not mean to imply that andy was in any way incorrect. i know of the icann attempt to take control of the numbers. and andy is correct to be concerned. i'm simply saying the function is nothing more then managing a database of objects - so a solution exists to replacing the existing number structure or transfer it over to a new database manager in case icann get to uppity. joe baptista On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, Jeff Williams wrote:

...

Joe and all,

Although Andy is correct and APNIC announced this some two to three weeks ago now yet removed the link, as did ICANN three days after this announcement was posted on Apnic-Talk ML as well as any associated links to it, Joe is also correct in his evaluation of how to handle this potential damaging aspect.

It should also be known that there are "Rumors" of new IP registries being created, to address this situation or future similar situations that the ICANN BoD may decide to engage in in the mid to long term. Some of these new IP registry have already received commitments for substantial funding. I wish I could be more specific on this, but until I have more solid information I cannot. We are working on this though....

!Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:

...
On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, Andy Gardner wrote:

...
IIRC, if they use anything but the "approved" root, ICANN will tell APNIC to re-assign the ISP's IP allotment.

remember - all that APNIC, ARIN and RIPE do is maintain a database of ip assignments. If ICANN becomes a problem and wants to play hitler - all it takes is ISP's to agree to change to another provider. The existing database managers can be replaced by popular consensus - so i would not be overly concerned - just ready.

regards joe baptista

The dot.GOD Registry, Limited The Executive Plaza, Suite 908 150 West 51st Street Tel: 1 (208) 330-4173 Manhattan Island NYC 10019 USA Fax: 1 (208) 293-9773

--------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Regards, -- Jeffrey A. Williams Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!) CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng. Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC. E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com Contact Number: 972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827 Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

-- Joe Baptista The dot.GOD Registry, Limited The Executive Plaza, Suite 908 150 West 51st Street Tel: 1 (208) 330-4173 Manhattan Island NYC 10019 USA Fax: 1 (208) 293-9773 --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Peter Mott

7:02 a.m.

...

Joe and all,

<snip> Please stop posting off topic material to this list Peter Mott Chief Enthusiast 2day.com -/- --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

!Dr. Joe Baptista

5:03 a.m.

On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Peter Mott wrote:

...

...
Joe and all,

<snip>

Please stop posting off topic material to this list

Andy was concerned about ip blocks assignments - and i replied. What was offtopic in that? fill me in. regards joe baptista -- Joe Baptista The dot.GOD Registry, Limited The Executive Plaza, Suite 908 150 West 51st Street Tel: 1 (208) 330-4173 Manhattan Island NYC 10019 USA Fax: 1 (208) 293-9773 --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

James Tyson

7:21 a.m.

...

...
Joe and all,

<snip>

Please stop posting off topic material to this list

I think that discussion of the IP Address allocation organisations is relevant to this list. Cheers. James Tyson --- Samizdat New Media Solutions --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Andy Gardner

7:29 a.m.

At 12:21 pm +1200 6/18/01, James Tyson wrote:

...

...
...
Joe and all,

<snip>

Please stop posting off topic material to this list

I think that discussion of the IP Address allocation organisations is relevant to this list.

Especially the possible replacement of APNIC by another organisation under the direct control of ICANN. -- Andrew P. Gardner barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP? We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare? Get active: http://www.tldlobby.com --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Jeff Williams

10:22 a.m.

Andy and all, Andy Gardner wrote:

...

At 12:21 pm +1200 6/18/01, James Tyson wrote:

...
...
...
Joe and all,

<snip>

Please stop posting off topic material to this list

I think that discussion of the IP Address allocation organisations is relevant to this list.

Especially the possible replacement of APNIC by another organisation under the direct control of ICANN.

I was referring to potential of several additional IP registries NOT under the control of ICANN.... Maybe I should have been more clear on this point...

...

-- Andrew P. Gardner barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP? We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare? Get active: http://www.tldlobby.com --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Jeff Williams

9:26 a.m.

Peter and all, None of my post that you snipped, was off topic. Please be specific as to what you felt was "Off Topic" is you would? >;) Thank you in advance for your cooperation.... Peter Mott wrote:

...

...
Joe and all,

<snip>

Please stop posting off topic material to this list

Peter Mott Chief Enthusiast 2day.com -/-

-- Jeffrey A. Williams Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!) CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng. Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC. E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com Contact Number: 972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827 Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208 --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Colin Palmer

6:19 a.m.

On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Pete wrote:

...

However, what gets me is all these transparent web-caches that due to their nature fail to proxy web-requests to alternative TLD sites.

At the risk of getting even more off-topic... I was under the impression that transparent in-line caches don't have to do DNS lookups at all as the web browser has already done that and tried to connect to the IP of the web site before the traffic is intercepted by the cache. (not that I'm a big fan of transparent caches, but I've never seen them block like that) --Colin. ** Colin Palmer, Systems and Development Group, University of Waikato, NZ ** --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

David Robb

6:27 a.m.

On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Colin Palmer wrote:

...

At the risk of getting even more off-topic... I was under the impression that transparent in-line caches don't have to do DNS lookups at all as the web browser has already done that and tried to connect to the IP of the web site before the traffic is intercepted by the cache.

They have this habit of using the Host header (http/1.1) to rebuild the URL that the connection is to, so the cache ends up trying to re-resolve the hostname. Just looking at the squid-2.4 src, there seems to be support for doing it differently when using the 2.4 Linux kernel iptables stuff. <goes to experiment on the users...> David Robb --- Senior Network Engineer DDI +64-9-359-2710 ihug (AS7657) NOC +64-9-359-2708 "The Earth is a single point of failure" --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

James Tyson

6:38 a.m.

...

...
However, what gets me is all these transparent web-caches that due to their nature fail to proxy web-requests to alternative TLD sites.

At the risk of getting even more off-topic... I was under the impression that transparent in-line caches don't have to do DNS lookups at all as the web browser has already done that and tried to connect to the IP of the web site before the traffic is intercepted by the cache.

(not that I'm a big fan of transparent caches, but I've never seen them block like that)

This is not true. You should *always* do DNS lookup's on all domains being requested of a web proxy. If you blindly use the IP address that has been resolved by the customer then you are opening yourself up for "cache hijacking" attacks. What's to stop me sending a request to the IP address of thehun.net with a host header of cnn.com thus forcing thehun's "interesting" content into the cache in place of cnn's "boring" content? At the very least you must make sure that the host header matches the IP address of the requested site. Cheers. James Tyson --- Samizdat New Media Solutions --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Don Stokes

6:58 a.m.

James Tyson wrote:

...

This is not true. You should *always* do DNS lookup's on all domains being requested of a web proxy. If you blindly use the IP address that has been resolved by the customer then you are opening yourself up for "cache hijacking" attacks. What's to stop me sending a request to the IP address of thehun.net with a host header of cnn.com thus forcing thehun's "interesting" content into the cache in place of cnn's "boring" content?

At the very least you must make sure that the host header matches the IP address of the requested site.

If the destination IP address does not match any address mapped by the Host: header, one could simply treat that as a cue not to cache the downloaded page(s), and continue to the supplied IP address. That approach would also help prevent surprises in cases where DNS caching means that the client's view of a given name differs from the ISP's. -- don --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Jeff Williams

8:05 a.m.

Pete and all This is the most reasonable response to this subject thread I have seen yet. (See more below Pete's comments) Pete wrote:

...

...
There are very strong technical reasons why alternative roots are a very bad idea. You have not provided any information to the contrary.

Fair call, Mark.

I have my 2c on the side to throw in also:

I believe its the clients choice wether they resolve their DNS through the usual channels (ie via the ISP's DNS server), or direct to an alternative root DNS server. And so it is, I am not aware of any ISP blocking lookups via servers outside their LAN.

However, what gets me is all these transparent web-caches that due to their nature fail to proxy web-requests to alternative TLD sites.

I'm not asking that ISPs change their primary DNS servers to do lookups on alternate servers. I just ask that that should I choose to do so then their web-cache engines proxy the pages correctly.

For instance, if I dial into Tasman Solutions (local Nelson ISP) and set my DNS resolver to an alternative server, I can connect to the web-page "www.pacroot" (as they have no transparent cache).

But if I dial into Paradise.NET and set my DNS resolver to an alternate server, I cannot access the web-page "www.pacroot" as the transparent web-cache at Paradise steps in and tells me "The system encountered an Unresolvable Host Name while attempting to retrieve http://www.pacroot/.". :(

Yep this is a problem. But not all "Alt.Roots" have this problem. In fact very few do...

...

I've asked Paradise.NET to key alternate root DNS server IP's into their Cache-Flows, and they've told me to go jump. Fair enough, its their call. It's just a shame that I have to vote with my feet.

They should have taken your suggestion. Of course you and I know why they didn't...

...

I guess what I am getting to - as an end user - is that its the ISP's choice if they want to resolve non-ICANN TLDs, but even if they don't, should they really be "blocking" them via their web-caches?

No they shouldn't, and most don't...

...

Thanks for listening :)

Pete.

Pete Mundy - Technician Advanced Communications +64-3-546-9169 / +64-25-480-840 E-Mail: Pete(a)AdvComm.Co.NZ

--------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Chris Wedgwood

16 Jun 16 Jun

6:05 p.m.

On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 03:23:35PM +0800, T McC wrote: Please find attached an Open Letter to all ISPs in New Zealand and all users of NZNOG. Sigh... This is in no way to be treated as SPAM. By what logic? The same logic I assume that if I see a comment and the end of an email message saying "This email message has been scanning by Snorkel Soft Anti-Blah Bloatware to ensure it is free of condoms and other prophylactics" --- I can disengage my brains and assume this to be correct? It is in response to the many misconceptions and uninformed comments made by ISPs in New Zealand and users of NZNOG as a result of the email I sent to ISPs in New Zealand asking them to adjust their server settings to accept access to the .z extension. Please read it and if any one has any comments or requires any further information please contact me. Well... I probably should ignore this, but since I'm feeling terrible and bitching always seems to help[1]: -- Generally I would recommend when sending email to a large group of people, restrict your content to text/plain and word-wrap and 80 columns or less -- Don't send large proprietary documents to a list, a better option would be to using HTML and post a URL to this document 95k Microsoft Word documents are almost certainly not acceptable I have made a quick attempt at converting this to HTML using Microsoft Word --- which as many would guess, does a _terrible_ job of this: http://f00f.org/morons/ol.html and I can't be bothered fixing it up (I've leave that to Joe!) -- As pointed out above, claiming something isn't SPAM doesn't make it so -- Why should _anybody_ want to do as you ask? You complain nobody has contacted you? You need to do something to prove your not a crank or marketroid with no clues, otherwise these people will exercise the delete key(s) (or clicky thing for those afraid to use a real MUA) -- By claiming most ISP have not taken "time to investigate ADNS.net or ORSC" is simply wrong and somewhat insulting --- many if not all ISPs will be familiar with such concepts preached and have already made decisions on how they choose to deal with them (or not deal with them, if that is the case) -- I repeat --- saying something isn't SPAM doesn't make it so -- I'm curious, what is WAPTERIX? -- I thought only marketroids talk about domains as always having 'www' prepended to them? -- Some of the people you quote have been around for a long time, they have much experience and whilst many are not as famous as Bill Gates, they have garnered far more respect -- You state: "Had Andy, as with all ISPs, taken the time to investigate ORSC and ADNS.net he would have seen that ORSC has a large number of regular users and has been around for some time." which is misleading. According to ADNS themselves, they received less than three million requests last month, barely a trickle. For comparison, checking ONE of several name-servers for a not-so-small NZ ISP that I would expect to be fairly quiet, I can see it alone does 12 million requests per month --- and it several and is not expect to experience a high load (in fact, most people won't even know it exists, it is almost exclusively used for services) -- You state: "... we have the right to choose whatever extension we desire to operate our business under." which is totally correct. And I will point of the rest of the world has the right to ignore you if they feel you have no authority or technically ability, if they think you are a crank or simply because they can't be bothered -- You complain nobody attempted to contact you... how is that anyones but YOUR problem? Heck, I keep asking people to send me money for no good reason, somehow though it just hasn't been successful. I guess the world is to blame, not me though. -- Don, whom I normally refrain from agreeing with :) stated: "Anyone who thinks alternative roots are a solution doesn't understand the problem with the DNS." actually make some sense here. Your response: "Obviously Don never investigated ORSC or else he would have seen that ORSC not only have their own servers spread throughout the world but also access the same servers currently accessed by ISPs to access .com, .net, .org, .co.nz etc" only reinforces this comment. The problem Don alludes to is alternative roots don't solve fundamental problems and in many ways make things worse --- having few or many name-servers with or without technicoloured stripes doesn't matter all that much -- claims are made that earthlink and @home amongst other people are supporting this --- attempts to query for ADNS domains from the Earthlink name-servers doesn't work for me (I didn't try very hard, twice then gave up). I assume you mention earthlink and @home to lend credibility to ADNS? I don't really follow the reasoning here. Microsoft is the worlds largest software producer... that hasn't made them very credible in as far as quality, security and elegance of design goes. In fact, their software is widely regarded as some of the worst out there by some --- and some of the best by others. We are all free to our own opinions and to make our own decisions (well, lets just pretend anyhow) -- The claim is made "Visibility of ORSC Top-Level domains jumps 54% in March." --- please define this and demonstrate it is indeed accurate My attempts to resolve "the.earth" using a list of name-servers produced as follows: - AXFR co.nz domain from ns99.waikato.ac.nz - extract as many name-server candidates as possible by looking for lines containing "IN NS ..." and use the name-server column - sort these by popularity, the assumption being the most frequent will be the most popular (maybe complete lies) - use the top 100, query each on for "the.earth" IN ANY and see what response we get and I got a total of 0 positive results, making this about as popular as the "Helen Clark Rervealed" Playboy Special. I expanded this to nearly 4900 name-servers and its still running as I write this, so far I have got a staggering 0 hits! Really, tell us what problem you are trying to solve, forget the marketing stuff and explain how, by configuring their name-servers for these alternative roots, NZ ISPs will benefit. Easier still, actually do something useful such that customers will _request_ NZ ISPs support these domains, surely none of them are going to ignore customer demand? --cw [1] "I'll try to be more tolerant if you try to be smarter" sort of bitching. --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Lin Nah

7:15 p.m.

1. You are sending UCE ie Unsolicited commercial email. This is against the AUP of your mail provider http://mymail.mail.com/templates/common/us/agreement.htm AND of the NZNOG list http://list.waikato.ac.nz/archives/nznog/2001/06/msg00011.html 2. You claim to be a legitimate business running your own domain registration. Yet you either don't have enough faith in your own business or are unable to provide yourself with a domain from your own .z TLD Instead you use a free email provider mail.com 3. Even if we wanted to take you seriously, you appear to be the president of a company supposedly dealing with the Internet and yet there is no suggestion of any Internet prescence. Where's the website? Where's your AS number? Where's your domain name? Are you a coporate member of ISOCNZ (not that that's a requirement for any company within the Internet industry)? Will you be presenting your .z at the ISOCNZ AGM this Friday? 4. Even if I wanted to keep an open mind and read what you wrote it is hard to take you seriously considering the number of errors in the original email sent out by you. The members of NZNOG are not representative of the ISP industry in NZ. However I would place great reliance on the opinions and views of many of the active participants in here as they actually know how the internet work and are often the people who make things work despite any attempts some have on trying to throw a wrench into the works. Lin Nah --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Keith Davidson

8:29 p.m.

Lin Nah wrote:

...

Where's the website? Where's your AS number? Where's your domain name? Are you a coporate member of ISOCNZ (not that that's a requirement for any company within the Internet industry)?

|whois wapterix.com: Domain Name: wapterix.com Status: production Trevarr McCarthy (template COCO-931530) z3(a)zfree.co.nz 60 Karen Crescent Hamilton, - - NZ Admin Contact: Trevarr McCarthy (COCO-931530) z3(a)zfree.co.nz Technical Contact: Fast DNS (COCO-68844) reg(a)fastdns.net 999-999-9999 CORE Registrar: CORE-95 Record created: 2001-02-05 00:13:11 UTC by CORE-95 Record expires: 2002-02-04 18:22:47 UTC Domain servers in listed order: ns.host4u.net 209.150.128.30 ns2.host4u.net 209.150.129.3 - Interesting "under construction" page at www.wapterix.com - No company names wapt* in the NZ companies register. - No Trev* McCarthy in the NZ directors and shareholders register. Keith Davidson --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Jeff Williams

11:19 p.m.

Keith and all, Perhaps wapterix.com or their associated company is of a different name or is non incorporated entity. The raising of an air of suspicion is not tantamount to being guilty of anything as you post below seems to imply. As such it would seem unseemly to suggest a "Witch Hunt" process here.... Keith Davidson wrote:

...

Lin Nah wrote:

...
Where's the website? Where's your AS number? Where's your domain name? Are you a coporate member of ISOCNZ (not that that's a requirement for any company within the Internet industry)?

|whois wapterix.com: Domain Name: wapterix.com Status: production Trevarr McCarthy (template COCO-931530) z3(a)zfree.co.nz 60 Karen Crescent Hamilton, - - NZ Admin Contact: Trevarr McCarthy (COCO-931530) z3(a)zfree.co.nz Technical Contact: Fast DNS (COCO-68844) reg(a)fastdns.net 999-999-9999 CORE Registrar: CORE-95 Record created: 2001-02-05 00:13:11 UTC by CORE-95 Record expires: 2002-02-04 18:22:47 UTC Domain servers in listed order: ns.host4u.net 209.150.128.30 ns2.host4u.net 209.150.129.3

- Interesting "under construction" page at www.wapterix.com

- No company names wapt* in the NZ companies register.

- No Trev* McCarthy in the NZ directors and shareholders register.

Keith Davidson

--------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Juha Saarinen

17 Jun 17 Jun

3:39 a.m.

Ahh... I don't know about that. Trevarr is peddling something that nobody's interested in, and is told so. Then, he has the gall to flame those who were honest enough to tell him how it is. Now he's drawn attention to himself, Wapterix and that .z stuff. He'll have to accept some close scrutiny then. -- Regards, Juha PGP fingerprint: B7E1 CC52 5FCA 9756 B502 10C8 4CD8 B066 12F3 9544 On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, Jeff Williams wrote:

...

Keith and all,

Perhaps wapterix.com or their associated company is of a different name or is non incorporated entity.

The raising of an air of suspicion is not tantamount to being guilty of anything as you post below seems to imply. As such it would seem unseemly to suggest a "Witch Hunt" process here....

--------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Keith Davidson

5:13 a.m.

Hi Jeff, Sorry if the implication was some sort of witch hunt. Lin Nah asked for information, and I provided the little information I had to hand. No sinister motives whatever, and as far as I am concerned, the only issue here is the method by which Trevarr has chosed to communicate with me. If others on this list feel his methods are appropriate, thats fine... Keith Davidson Jeff Williams wrote:

...

Keith and all,

Perhaps wapterix.com or their associated company is of a different name or is non incorporated entity.

The raising of an air of suspicion is not tantamount to being guilty of anything as you post below seems to imply. As such it would seem unseemly to suggest a "Witch Hunt" process here....

--------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Jeff Williams

16 Jun 16 Jun

9:50 p.m.

Lin and all, I think that it is a bit over the top to classify the E-Mail to which you refer as UCE or spam. I understand that you are not in agreement with other TLD's being suggested to be added to name servers at different ISP's. However I see nothing wrong with the "Request" that this person made. As it was a "Request" not an advertisement, I find it difficult to characterize the "Request" as a UCE or spam.... Lin Nah wrote:

...

1. You are sending UCE ie Unsolicited commercial email.

This is against the AUP of your mail provider http://mymail.mail.com/templates/common/us/agreement.htm AND of the NZNOG list http://list.waikato.ac.nz/archives/nznog/2001/06/msg00011.html

2. You claim to be a legitimate business running your own domain registration. Yet you either don't have enough faith in your own business or are unable to provide yourself with a domain from your own .z TLD

Instead you use a free email provider mail.com

3. Even if we wanted to take you seriously, you appear to be the president of a company supposedly dealing with the Internet and yet there is no suggestion of any Internet prescence.

Where's the website? Where's your AS number? Where's your domain name? Are you a coporate member of ISOCNZ (not that that's a requirement for any company within the Internet industry)?

Will you be presenting your .z at the ISOCNZ AGM this Friday?

4. Even if I wanted to keep an open mind and read what you wrote it is hard to take you seriously considering the number of errors in the original email sent out by you.

The members of NZNOG are not representative of the ISP industry in NZ. However I would place great reliance on the opinions and views of many of the active participants in here as they actually know how the internet work and are often the people who make things work despite any attempts some have on trying to throw a wrench into the works.

Lin Nah

--------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Brian Gibbons

17 Jun 17 Jun

2:33 a.m.

...

From: "T McC" Please find attached an Open Letter to all ISPs in New Zealand and all users of NZNOG.

Dear Trevarr McCarthy Just a few issues for you to digest 1. Please remove the reference in your Word document to one of my domains (mydomain.co.nz). 2. Our Name Servers do not support what you require, as the resultant configuration differs from reality and our servers will complain about that - and stop dead. 3. A fair chunk of our clients (especially multinationals) run standalone DNS servers (e.g. Windows NT/MS Exchange) thus you will have to distribute your request to all New Zealand businesses and convince them to reconfigure their systems. Also you will need to get Microsoft to change the software, otherwise the DNS config will go backwards each time they reinstall or set up a Microsoft Server. Cheers BG. --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Andy Linton

7:43 a.m.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, T McC wrote:

...

Please find attached an Open Letter to all ISPs in New Zealand and all users of NZNOG.

This is in no way to be treated as SPAM. It is in response to the many misconceptions and uninformed comments made by ISPs in New Zealand and users of NZNOG as a result of the email I sent to ISPs in New Zealand asking them to adjust their server settings to accept access to the .z extension.

Please read it and if any one has any comments or requires any further information please contact me.

Trevarr, Let me commend you for your ability to annoy a very large number of the people you would have needed to convince to get your schemes off the ground: 1) You've told them they don't know how to recognize SPAM - I can see in your case that as it's "Specially Prepared Advertising Material" we should read it and be grateful that you've sent it to us. I and many others on this list get sufficiently large amounts of SPAM that our detectors work extremely well. Someone else used the "looks like a duck..." metaphor for this. I'd probably favour "looks like it, smells like it, I'm glad we didn't walk in it" metaphor. 2) You posted in a proprietary format - MS Word. You immediately reduced your clue rating. Chris Wedgwood translated otherwise I wouldn't have seen your comments. 3) You chose to imply that some of of us are too stupid to understand, too lazy to investigate, work for organisations that haven't been around for very long compared with ADNS (1993).... In your response to my comments, you say had I (and several others) bothered to investigate ORSC and ADNS ... This implies that had I done so I would immediately have been bowled over by the technical arguments presented and would have joined the bandwagon that you are pushing. The DNS nameservers work by having a rooted tree - if I want my servers to include these other namespaces then I have to change my configuration so that it uses an alternative set of roots that happens to include the existing IETF/ICANN official servers or I have to change the software I run. If I do that I run a risk, it's as simple as that. You've presented some options to me and I don't think the risk is acceptable. This is is not based on discussions on the nznog list over the last few weeks. This is based on 18 years experience using the Internet and in fact predating the introduction of the DNS in 1987. RFC 2870 - Root Name Server Operational Requirements, June 2000 (ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2870.txt) has this to say: Abstract As the internet becomes increasingly critical to the world's social and economic infrastructure, attention has rightly focused on the correct, safe, reliable, and secure operation of the internet infrastructure itself. The root domain name servers are seen as a crucial part of that technical infrastructure. The primary focus of this document is to provide guidelines for operation of the root name servers. Other major zone server operators (gTLDs, ccTLDs, major zones) may also find it useful. These guidelines are intended to meet the perceived societal needs without overly prescribing technical details. 1. Background The resolution of domain names on the internet is critically dependent on the proper, safe, and secure operation of the root domain name servers. Currently, these dozen or so servers are provided and operated by a very competent and trusted group of volunteers. This document does not propose to change that, but merely to provide formal guidelines so that the community understands how and why this is done. 1.1 The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) has become responsible for the operation of the root servers. The ICANN has appointed a Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC) to give technical and operational advice to the ICANN board. The ICANN and the RSSAC look to the IETF to provide engineering standards. Now when there's an RFC from the IETF saying we should rush off to ADNS and put our DNS requests through them, I'll be happy to make the change but until then I've added your name to my email kill filters. andy -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.5 (FreeBSD) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQE7LU6gkNpmQ2ketuURAhmiAKCG8OUhvl8wMMX3OxZnZ6PY64NAoQCfaz1C ARLsZDJzXUKu0tz1NAXCeJM= =4EjF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Jeff Williams

10:30 a.m.

Andy and all, Your reference to RFC 2970 is a recent politically motivated revision of the original that is not being widely accepted presently and has been hotly debated on various other forums that I am aware of and participate in, on a few. John Kliensen along with "Harald(a)alvestrand.no" were the main drivers of this revised version of RFC 2870 to which you refer. I will leave my comments to the revised RFC 2870 as they are presently, as a lengthy debate over it is not likely to be productive here. And let others decide for themselves where they stand on it and it's potential implications. Andy Linton wrote:

...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, T McC wrote:

...
Please find attached an Open Letter to all ISPs in New Zealand and all users of NZNOG.

This is in no way to be treated as SPAM. It is in response to the many misconceptions and uninformed comments made by ISPs in New Zealand and users of NZNOG as a result of the email I sent to ISPs in New Zealand asking them to adjust their server settings to accept access to the .z extension.

Please read it and if any one has any comments or requires any further information please contact me.

Trevarr,

Let me commend you for your ability to annoy a very large number of the people you would have needed to convince to get your schemes off the ground:

1) You've told them they don't know how to recognize SPAM - I can see in your case that as it's "Specially Prepared Advertising Material" we should read it and be grateful that you've sent it to us. I and many others on this list get sufficiently large amounts of SPAM that our detectors work extremely well.

Someone else used the "looks like a duck..." metaphor for this. I'd probably favour "looks like it, smells like it, I'm glad we didn't walk in it" metaphor.

2) You posted in a proprietary format - MS Word. You immediately reduced your clue rating. Chris Wedgwood translated otherwise I wouldn't have seen your comments.

3) You chose to imply that some of of us are too stupid to understand, too lazy to investigate, work for organisations that haven't been around for very long compared with ADNS (1993)....

In your response to my comments, you say had I (and several others) bothered to investigate ORSC and ADNS ...

This implies that had I done so I would immediately have been bowled over by the technical arguments presented and would have joined the bandwagon that you are pushing.

The DNS nameservers work by having a rooted tree - if I want my servers to include these other namespaces then I have to change my configuration so that it uses an alternative set of roots that happens to include the existing IETF/ICANN official servers or I have to change the software I run.

If I do that I run a risk, it's as simple as that. You've presented some options to me and I don't think the risk is acceptable. This is is not based on discussions on the nznog list over the last few weeks. This is based on 18 years experience using the Internet and in fact predating the introduction of the DNS in 1987.

RFC 2870 - Root Name Server Operational Requirements, June 2000 (ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2870.txt) has this to say:

Abstract

As the internet becomes increasingly critical to the world's social and economic infrastructure, attention has rightly focused on the correct, safe, reliable, and secure operation of the internet infrastructure itself. The root domain name servers are seen as a crucial part of that technical infrastructure. The primary focus of this document is to provide guidelines for operation of the root name servers. Other major zone server operators (gTLDs, ccTLDs, major zones) may also find it useful. These guidelines are intended to meet the perceived societal needs without overly prescribing technical details.

1. Background

The resolution of domain names on the internet is critically dependent on the proper, safe, and secure operation of the root domain name servers. Currently, these dozen or so servers are provided and operated by a very competent and trusted group of volunteers. This document does not propose to change that, but merely to provide formal guidelines so that the community understands how and why this is done.

1.1 The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) has become responsible for the operation of the root servers. The ICANN has appointed a Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC) to give technical and operational advice to the ICANN board. The ICANN and the RSSAC look to the IETF to provide engineering standards.

Now when there's an RFC from the IETF saying we should rush off to ADNS and put our DNS requests through them, I'll be happy to make the change but until then I've added your name to my email kill filters.

andy

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.5 (FreeBSD) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76

iD8DBQE7LU6gkNpmQ2ketuURAhmiAKCG8OUhvl8wMMX3OxZnZ6PY64NAoQCfaz1C ARLsZDJzXUKu0tz1NAXCeJM= =4EjF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Andy Linton

9:24 a.m.

On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, Jeff Williams wrote:

...

Andy and all,

Your reference to RFC 2970 is a recent politically motivated revision of the original that is not being widely accepted presently and has been hotly debated on various other forums that I am aware of and participate in, on a few. John Kliensen along with "Harald(a)alvestrand.no" were the main drivers of this revised version of RFC 2870 to which you refer.

Really? RFC 2870 is an IETF Best Common Practices document which says the following: Status of this Memo This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. The authors are Randy Bush, Daniel Karrenberg, Mark Kosters and Raymond Plzak. I know three of these people personally and I'm inclined to trust their judgment on this issue. Randy Bush is one of the Area Directors of the Operations and Management Area of the IETF (http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/wg-dir.html). How credible do we need people to be here? For your info we don't have revised versions of RFCs. An RFC gets obsoleted by a later RFC after a period of discussion and agreement by the IETF. RFC2010 dated 1996 was replaced after this process was followed. John Klensen was a contributor to the document and is acknowledged as such: The authors would like to thank Scott Bradner, Robert Elz, Chris Fletcher, John Klensin, Steve Bellovin, and Vern Paxson for their constructive comments. Harald Alvestrand isn't mentioned although he is also an IETF Area Director. I'd also have to say that if Robert Elz is content with the provisions of RFC 2870 then I'm pretty comfortable.

...

I will leave my comments to the revised RFC 2870 as they are presently, as a lengthy debate over it is not likely to be productive here. And let others decide for themselves where they stand on it and it's potential implications.

I'd suggest that if you and your colleagues aren't happy with RFC 2870 then you go through the process to get it changed. It's clearly documented at http://www.ietf.org/ID.html When you win the argument there, come back to the list and I think you'll find that the reception will be much more cordial. --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

Jeff Williams

12:46 p.m.

Andy and all, Yes I know very well what is says, Andy. That doesn't change the facts regarding what I posted... Andy Linton wrote:

...

On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, Jeff Williams wrote:

...
Andy and all,

Your reference to RFC 2970 is a recent politically motivated revision of the original that is not being widely accepted presently and has been hotly debated on various other forums that I am aware of and participate in, on a few. John Kliensen along with "Harald(a)alvestrand.no" were the main drivers of this revised version of RFC 2870 to which you refer.

Really? RFC 2870 is an IETF Best Common Practices document which says the following:

Status of this Memo

This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

The authors are Randy Bush, Daniel Karrenberg, Mark Kosters and Raymond Plzak. I know three of these people personally and I'm inclined to trust their judgment on this issue. Randy Bush is one of the Area Directors of the Operations and Management Area of the IETF (http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/wg-dir.html). How credible do we need people to be here?

For your info we don't have revised versions of RFCs. An RFC gets obsoleted by a later RFC after a period of discussion and agreement by the IETF. RFC2010 dated 1996 was replaced after this process was followed.

John Klensen was a contributor to the document and is acknowledged as such:

The authors would like to thank Scott Bradner, Robert Elz, Chris Fletcher, John Klensin, Steve Bellovin, and Vern Paxson for their constructive comments.

Harald Alvestrand isn't mentioned although he is also an IETF Area Director.

I'd also have to say that if Robert Elz is content with the provisions of RFC 2870 then I'm pretty comfortable.

...
I will leave my comments to the revised RFC 2870 as they are presently, as a lengthy debate over it is not likely to be productive here. And let others decide for themselves where they stand on it and it's potential implications.

I'd suggest that if you and your colleagues aren't happy with RFC 2870 then you go through the process to get it changed. It's clearly documented at http://www.ietf.org/ID.html

When you win the argument there, come back to the list and I think you'll find that the reception will be much more cordial.

Philip Beckmann

18 Jun 18 Jun

4:53 a.m.

Trevarr McCarthy, Thankyou for reminding me once again that there are some real idiots out there (I mean who would offend half the people you are requesting help from?). I absolutely treat your email as spam. Even if I could, I would never add any of your requested top level domains to my servers. I never saw such a pile of hogwash arguments such as in your last email, but if these achieved anything apart from wasting everybody's time, they confirmed my suspicions that your initial request was ridiculous. There are proper channels for applying for top level domains, and unless they are approved by this process they will never be accessible from my network, as for .z I will ensure that none of my customers can ever access it. phil

...

-----Original Message----- From: owner-nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz [mailto:owner-nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz]On Behalf Of T McC Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2001 7:24 p To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Open Letter to all NZ ISPs and users of NZNOG

Please find attached an Open Letter to all ISPs in New Zealand and all users of NZNOG.

This is in no way to be treated as SPAM. It is in response to the many misconceptions and uninformed comments made by ISPs in New Zealand and users of NZNOG as a result of the email I sent to ISPs in New Zealand asking them to adjust their server settings to accept access to the .z extension.

Please read it and if any one has any comments or requires any further information please contact me.

Yours

Trevarr McCarthy President The Wapterix Internet Group --

_______________________________________________ FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup

Make PC-to-Phone calls with Net2Phone. Sign-up today at: http://www.net2phone.com/cgi-bin/link.cgi?121

--

_______________________________________________ FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup

Make PC-to-Phone calls with Net2Phone. Sign-up today at: http://www.net2phone.com/cgi-bin/link.cgi?121

--------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog

8588

Age (days ago)

8590

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

37 comments

20 participants

participants (20)

!Dr. Joe Baptista
Andy Gardner
Andy Linton
Brian Gibbons
Chris Rigby
Chris Wedgwood
Colin Palmer
David Robb
Don Stokes
James Tyson
Jeff Williams
Juha Saarinen
Keith Davidson
Lin Nah
Mark Goldfinch
Matthias Dallmeier
Pete
Peter Mott
Philip Beckmann
T McC