Re: [nznog] Email for domains hosted by 2day.com
In message
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Ewen McNeill wrote:
And if nothing else it's probably useful to have a single document to wave at people saying "these are all the bad things you've caused by doing this".
That's been documented already, as in the 2day.com case.
To reinforce the "one list with which to beat people up", this post on NANOG: http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/msg13728.html points out that Verisign are in an interesting position with HTTPS access: not only do they have the wildcard DNS entry to draw traffic their way (apparently consuming one AS and two /24s on the way past), they've also got the trusted CA certificates to sign any SSL certificates needed (on the fly if they wish). The little "trusted site" closed lock on, eg: https://www.placetobuystuff.com/ is (amazinginly) a little less meaningful than it was before. (I'm also amazed that, apparently, no one has registered that domain name. It seems such an obvious one for the type-stuff-in-and-see-what-happens crowd.) FWIW, these: http://www.haque.net/verisign_dns_rant.php http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/msg13682.html aren't a bad (early) start at a summary of problems (from Tuesday). Ewen
Ewen McNeill wrote:
In message
, Juha Saarinen writes: On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Ewen McNeill wrote:
And if nothing else it's probably useful to have a single document to wave at people saying "these are all the bad things you've caused by doing this".
That's been documented already, as in the 2day.com case.
Speaking of the 2day.com case, more information is coming to hand regarding how our name was removed from the .com zone. A NZ resident complained to ICANN that our whois record had bad data in it. ICANN referred the complaint to DomainDiscover who apparrently sent me an email. Because they did not receive a reply, sometime after that they changed the status of the domain to REGISTRAR-HOLD and advised ICANN that they had done so. Needless to say there are more questions being asked. regards -- Peter Mott Chief Enthusiast 2DAY INTERNET LIMITED http://www.2day.com "Hell, there are no rules here - we're trying to accomplish something!" Thomas A Edison
So if i was to say "ihug.net" has bad data.... that will mean ihug.net will get deleted also? :) Antonio Broughton At 09:19 19/09/2003 +1200, you wrote:
Ewen McNeill wrote:
In message
, Juha Saarinen writes: On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Ewen McNeill wrote:
And if nothing else it's probably useful to have a single document to wave at people saying "these are all the bad things you've caused by doing this".
That's been documented already, as in the 2day.com case.
Speaking of the 2day.com case, more information is coming to hand regarding how our name was removed from the .com zone.
A NZ resident complained to ICANN that our whois record had bad data in it. ICANN referred the complaint to DomainDiscover who apparrently sent me an email. Because they did not receive a reply, sometime after that they changed the status of the domain to REGISTRAR-HOLD and advised ICANN that they had done so.
Needless to say there are more questions being asked.
regards
-- Peter Mott Chief Enthusiast 2DAY INTERNET LIMITED http://www.2day.com
"Hell, there are no rules here - we're trying to accomplish something!" Thomas A Edison
_______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
On 19 Sep 2003 at 9:17, Antonio Broughton wrote:
So if i was to say "ihug.net" has bad data.... that will mean ihug.net will get deleted also? :)
More to the point if someone said that the nz record is bad: [snip] Technical Contact: Name: ITS Operators Organization: The University of Waikato Address1: Private Bag 3105 [snip] would that get deleted too?
Hardly NZ's fault. You can tell all the people in and around InternetNZ
who've dealt with ICANN by the bruised and bloodied foreheads from
banging them against that particular brick wall.
There have been numerous change requests sent since 2000.
The last round managed to get the admin contacts changed, and we've
always managed to get the name servers changed (after battling with them
for more than a month each time).
Somebody resurrect Jon Postel. I don't care what dark arts are involved.
-- don
Robert Gray
On 19 Sep 2003 at 9:17, Antonio Broughton wrote:
So if i was to say "ihug.net" has bad data.... that will mean ihug.net will get deleted also? :)
More to the point if someone said that the nz record is bad:
[snip] Technical Contact: Name: ITS Operators Organization: The University of Waikato Address1: Private Bag 3105 [snip]
would that get deleted too? _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
Don Stokes wrote:
Somebody resurrect Jon Postel. I don't care what dark arts are involved.
I have performed a few miracles this week, let me know if you need help. Its not every day a zone gets entered directly into the conf file on a gTLD name server, bypassing the registry fu. regards -- Peter Mott Chief Enthusiast 2DAY INTERNET LIMITED http://www.2day.com "Hell, there are no rules here - we're trying to accomplish something!" Thomas A Edison
participants (5)
-
Antonio Broughton
-
Don Stokes
-
Ewen McNeill
-
Peter Mott
-
Robert Gray