At 02:28 PM 10/11/99 -0700, you wrote:
>"Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> No, it's authority will Paul - real or preceived. He has this
>> thing about an "unbroken chain of authoiry" andhe can express
>> his views better than I can.
>
>I can't quite make out what you mean here.
"Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, it's authority will Paul - real or preceived. He has this
> thing about an "unbroken chain of authoiry" andhe can express
> his views better than I can.
I can't quite make out what you mean here. It seems as if you are
saying that he feels th
At 01:28 PM 10/11/99 -0700, you wrote:
>"Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Absolutely nothing short of bowing to the dictator du jour (IAHC,
>> ICANN) will get Vixie "on my side" and I really don't care. He was
>> wgonr about useent and he's wrong now. The NTIA has no
>> authority
"Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Absolutely nothing short of bowing to the dictator du jour (IAHC,
> ICANN) will get Vixie "on my side" and I really don't care. He was
> wgonr about useent and he's wrong now. The NTIA has no
> authority. Who cares?
Authority isn't the issue. It'
At 12:52 PM 10/11/99 -0700, you wrote:
>"Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> At 11:47 AM 10/11/99 -0700, Greg Skinner wrote:
>
>>> Generally speaking, Usenet consists of a user population that is
>>> generally much more Internet savvy than the Internet population at
>>> large.
>
>>
"Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 11:47 AM 10/11/99 -0700, Greg Skinner wrote:
>> Generally speaking, Usenet consists of a user population that is
>> generally much more Internet savvy than the Internet population at
>> large.
> So ?
> The point it, it works. It's not a probl
At 11:47 AM 10/11/99 -0700, you wrote:
>"Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Ok, right, and this is exactly the same as sombody on usenet
>> listing their email address as [EMAIL PROTECTED] [1] in
>> their signature line. The practice is extremely widespread,
>> and poeple are still
"Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, right, and this is exactly the same as sombody on usenet
> listing their email address as [EMAIL PROTECTED] [1] in
> their signature line. The practice is extremely widespread,
> and poeple are still able to communicate just fine. One of
> the
>Most people who use the Internet have little if any knowledge of what
>domain names are or what they represent, structurally. Thus, if they
>are presented with an address like tangled.web, no flag goes off in
>their head saying "oops, that is not an IANA TLD, so I have to do
>something different
Brian and all,
Indeed I believe you to be correct here Biran. And a sad state
of affairs it is as well. Surely we can do better than this.
Brian C. Hollingsworth wrote:
> Mr. Baptista and Everyone,
>
> It seem very odd that some of Mr. Shaw's rather dubious reputation could
> have ever fo
At 10:06 AM 10/11/99 -0700, you wrote:
>"Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> What is all this garbage about Internet Stability Greg? DNS id the most
>> robust protocal to ever run over a TCP/IP transport. What instability
>> are you talking about?
>
>It's the stability of the namesp
Mr. Baptista and Everyone,
It seem very odd that some of Mr. Shaw's rather dubious reputation could
have ever found himself on the GAC as has I believe been pointed out
on several occasions. Whatever possessed the NTIA or the ICANN
Board to allow such a person to be on the GAC is beyond my abi
> OTOH we have working tlds and root servers.
Richard, I never said your stuff wasn't working. In fact I have used
it. However, I am a seasoned Internet professional. I know how to use
it within the constraints I operate under.
Most people who use the Internet have little if any knowledge of
"Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What is all this garbage about Internet Stability Greg? DNS id the most
> robust protocal to ever run over a TCP/IP transport. What instability
> are you talking about?
It's the stability of the namespace, from the perspective of those who
are try
>I was thinking of some of ICANN's financial backers (e.g. Cisco) and
>some of the associations that support ICANN. Perhaps they are not
>well-organized, but imho, they are much better organized than the
>alternative root movements.
They do different things. Cisco pays for Joe Sims and Ogilvy. O
What is all this garbage about Internet Stability Greg? DNS id the most
robust protocal to ever run over a TCP/IP transport. What instability
are you talking about?
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I see you've got yout fist out. Say your peace and get out. Guess
I get the gi
At 08:53 AM 10/11/99 -0700, you wrote:
>"Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Greg Skinner wrote:
>
>>> ... you cannot compare the two because usenet is not critical
>>> infrastructure to Internet operation as DNS is. This is not to say
>>> that usenet is not important. However, it
Kent Crispin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Some of [ICANN's supporters] are financially endowed, but, speaking
> from insider knowledge, it is patently absurd to say that they are
> well-organized.
I was thinking of some of ICANN's financial backers (e.g. Cisco) and
some of the associations that
"Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Greg Skinner wrote:
>> ... you cannot compare the two because usenet is not critical
>> infrastructure to Internet operation as DNS is. This is not to say
>> that usenet is not important. However, it is nowhere near as
>> necessary for reliable
>You keep bringing up the creation of alternative hierarchies in usenet
>as an example of how the Internet has figured out a problem. I don't
>deny this, however, the point I keep returning to is that you can't
>compare the two because usenet is not critical infrastructure to
>Internet operation
On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, Kent Crispin wrote:
> Santiago meeting; how to deal with the press, and a bunch of other
> stuff.
>
> http://wxw.dso.net/ca-steering, on the other hand, documents a major
> rift.
Interesting stuff. I noticed I had alot to do with the rift. The
committee members keep i
On Sun, Oct 10, 1999 at 09:42:57PM -0700, Greg Skinner wrote:
[...]
>
> Ellen Rony points out corrected that ICANN's supporters are well
> organized and financially endowed.
Some of them are financially endowed, but, speaking from insider
knowledge, it is patently absurd to say that they are wel
"Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Greg Skinner wrote:
>> Do you think the Internet community will ever figure it out?
> Do you get alt.sex?
You keep bringing up the creation of alternative hierarchies in usenet
as an example of how the Internet has figured out a problem. I don'
At 09:42 PM 10/10/99 -0700, you wrote:
>"Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> The third option is to leave everybopdy alone and wait till
>> they figure it out. It's the slowest, but the "cleanest".
>
>Do you think the Internet community will ever figure it out?
Do you get alt.sex?
"Richard J. Sexton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The third option is to leave everybopdy alone and wait till
> they figure it out. It's the slowest, but the "cleanest".
Do you think the Internet community will ever figure it out?
In the past, there has never been an issue faced by the technical
At 03:18 PM 10/10/99 -0400, you wrote:
>
>On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, Greg Skinner wrote:
>
>> I imagine if there were some sort of investigation, it would reveal
>> that the alternative root movement is not yet organized enough to
>> deliver the quality of service delivered by the established root
>> mo
On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, Greg Skinner wrote:
> I imagine if there were some sort of investigation, it would reveal
> that the alternative root movement is not yet organized enough to
> deliver the quality of service delivered by the established root
> movement. If the alternative root movement want
"J. Baptista" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Your absolutly right. [Vixie] has no obligation whatsoever to
> educate the community. As I said the distribution of a fixed root
> cache with BIND is a bit of an anti rackets game, but that legality
> I leave to others to test.
I imagine if there wer
On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, Patrick Greenwell wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, J. Baptista wrote:
>
> >
> > On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, Joseph Friedman wrote:
> >
> > > So anytime a root server is added or moved (and its IP# changes) the only
> > > for all the DNS servers worldwide to know of the change(s) i
On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, J. Baptista wrote:
>
> On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, Joseph Friedman wrote:
>
> > So anytime a root server is added or moved (and its IP# changes) the only
> > for all the DNS servers worldwide to know of the change(s) is to manually
> > update the list?
>
> Yup, or as richard sa
On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, Joseph Friedman wrote:
> So anytime a root server is added or moved (and its IP# changes) the only
> for all the DNS servers worldwide to know of the change(s) is to manually
> update the list?
Yup, or as richard said - if they upgrade bind - so do they upgrade the
root c
At 01:23 AM 10/10/1999 -0400, J. Baptista wrote:
>On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, Joseph Friedman wrote:
>
> > So when a new root server is added, how do all the DNS servers on the net
> > know of it?
>
>It's up to every sites administrator to keep up on current affairs and
>replace the cache as needed when
On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, Richard J. Sexton wrote:
> At 12:45 AM 10/10/99 -0400, you wrote:
> >Hello,
> >
> >Who distributes the root list that local DNS servers use? If the roots
> >change, or if the IP# changes how do they know about the change?
> >
> >--Joseph
>
> BIND ships from ISC with the I
At 12:45 AM 10/10/99 -0400, you wrote:
>Hello,
>
>Who distributes the root list that local DNS servers use? If the roots
>change, or if the IP# changes how do they know about the change?
>
>--Joseph
BIND ships from ISC with the IANA legacy root preconfigured.
People upgrade BIND much more ofte
On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, Joseph Friedman wrote:
> So when a new root server is added, how do all the DNS servers on the net
> know of it?
It's up to every sites administrator to keep up on current affairs and
replace the cache as needed when root-servers are upgraded. The only
upgrade I ever hear
On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, Joseph Friedman wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Who distributes the root list that local DNS servers use? If the roots
> change, or if the IP# changes how do they know about the change?
No distribution. And no ip changes allowed. It's a very static system at
the root level resulti
Hello,
Who distributes the root list that local DNS servers use? If the roots
change, or if the IP# changes how do they know about the change?
--Joseph
37 matches
Mail list logo
