Michael Sondow wrote:
> It's not delegated to the tech contact. It's arrogated by the
> tech contact.
> There's a big, big difference. The only ISP who lets the client
> have control
> over the zone file is pgmedia, where the client is not only the admin and
> billing contacts but also the tech c
What you don't understand is that I do not have the technical
understanding at the detailed level that is required to get it all
right, but my mail forwarder at ics.uci.edu is upportive and only puts
in the NMA.COM zone file what I agree to have put there. He controls
the passward, but does not d
Einar Stefferud a écrit:
> And, for Michael's information, the fact that he has contractred with
> an ISP to do everythig for his DNS Zone, and not let him have password
> control of it is his decision and not a feature of the DNS!
>
> In my own case, I cvontrol all aspects of the content of my
Roeland M.J. Meyer a écrit:
> There is some argument that one can use a Windows machine for primary DNS.
I'm a typical end-user. I have a laptop running Windows95. There are
configuration pop-ups for TCP/IP and DNS confirguration. But I've never seen
a book anywhere, and I've been looking for o
At 12:16 PM 2/8/99 -0500, Michael Sondow wrote:
>Roeland M.J. Meyer a écrit:
>
>> Anyone with knowledge, a Unix system, and a full-time Internet connection
>> can do the same.
>
>Do the average domain name holders have the knowledge, a Unix machine, and
>an Internet connection of their own? If not
Kent Crispin wrote:
>If the RCs can ignore the hearings at will, then the hearings in
>general are useless, and they might as well be stricken from the
>document.
I don't think they can ignore the hearings at will, but they need to be
able to exercise their professional judgment about what is
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Michael Sondow writes:
> The average client of an ISP, that is, the average domain name
> holder, cannot tell the ISP what to put into their zone file. I've
> had trouble with every single one of the five ISPs I've used because
> of this, and I've heard the same st
On Mon, Feb 08, 1999 at 12:16:50PM -0500, Jay Fenello wrote:
> At 2/8/99, 11:48 AM, Kent Crispin wrote:
> >
> >I am not talking about there being just *one* hearing. As soon as
> >the first FH concludes, the second one will be requested, and then
> >after that the third, and so on. As far as I c
Dr Eberhard W Lisse a écrit:
> the zone file sits on grumpy.net.na as per an agreement with a local
> ISP. Whether they give me physical write access is not the issue,
> rather that I decide what gets written into it.
The average client of an ISP, that is, the average domain name holder,
cannot
Roeland M.J. Meyer a écrit:
> Anyone with knowledge, a Unix system, and a full-time Internet connection
> can do the same.
Do the average domain name holders have the knowledge, a Unix machine, and
an Internet connection of their own? If not, what is the point to this
discussion?
At 2/8/99, 11:48 AM, Kent Crispin wrote:
>On Mon, Feb 08, 1999 at 09:45:28AM -0500, Bret A. Fausett wrote:
>> Kent Crispin wrote:
>> >Running the hearing slows down the process, intrinsically. A hearing
>> >takes time that would have been spent doing other things. As long as
>> >I am guaranteed
On Mon, Feb 08, 1999 at 09:45:28AM -0500, Bret A. Fausett wrote:
> Kent Crispin wrote:
> >Running the hearing slows down the process, intrinsically. A hearing
> >takes time that would have been spent doing other things. As long as
> >I am guaranteed a "fair hearing" at will, I can slow down the
At 2/8/99, 09:27 AM, John B. Reynolds wrote:
>
> 5.11 Further Review of Changes
>
> Whenever a proposal has been changed as a result of
> the preceding processes, any changes resulting from
> such processes shall be republished on the DNSO
> website and subject to review under the prior
> provisio
In message <000801be5376$4f8dec20$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "David Schutt" wr
ites:
> Translation: Expediency is more important than fairness
No, that was a 3 on th Kent-Meter.
el
On Mon, 8 Feb 1999, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
> At 09:49 PM 2/7/99 -0500, Michael Sondow wrote:
>> John B. Reynolds a écrit:
>
>>> Every domain name holder directly or indirectly administers a DNS zone
>>> file. Are you sure you're not confusing "DNS zone" with "root zone"?
>>
>> No, the domai
Not a good example, my browser timed out.
There are lots of experimental and/or educational systems out there, I'm
more interested in commercial services that can take a spike without
gasping.
David Schutt
> Linux and BIND are both free software. The real sticking point is the
> requisite perm
Translation: Expediency is more important than fairness
David Schutt
>
> Running the hearing slows down the process, intrinsically. A hearing
> takes time that would have been spent doing other things. As long as
> I am guaranteed a "fair hearing" at will, I can slow down the
> process.
>
>
John B. Reynolds wrote:
> 5.11 Further Review of Changes
>
> Whenever a proposal has been changed as a result of
> the preceding processes, any changes resulting from
> such processes shall be republished on the DNSO
> website and subject to review under the prior
> provisions of this section.
>
Kent Crispin wrote:
>Running the hearing slows down the process, intrinsically. A hearing
>takes time that would have been spent doing other things. As long as
>I am guaranteed a "fair hearing" at will, I can slow down the
>process.
If a hearing catches and corrects a problem before the process
Bret A. Fausett wrote:
>
> Einar Stefferud wrote:
>
> >Here I am in strong agreement that the whole concept of Fair Hearing
> >Panels has been subvertted by inavertant editing whcih converts them
> >into a mecahisim to be used to stop progress on any Research Committee
> >proposal that someone do
> You contact with an ISP to create and maintain a zone file on your behalf.
> If you don't like what they do with it, you can move to another
> ISP or make
> other arrangements. Ultimate control remains vested in you. I don't see
> how I could make this any more clear than I already have.
Oop
Michael Sondow wrote:
>
> John B. Reynolds a écrit:
>
> > You administer your zone indirectly by controlling which ISP runs it
> > directly.
>
> Administer the zone indirectly? What are you talking about? Is this a game
> of semantics to you? It's a file. How do I change it's contents
> when it's
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Roeland M.J. Meyer" wri
tes:
> At 09:49 PM 2/7/99 -0500, Michael Sondow wrote:
> >John B. Reynolds a écrit:
>
> >> Every domain name holder directly or
> >> indirectly administers a DNS zone file. Are you sure you're not
> >> confusing "DNS zone" with "root zone
Michael,
John is right.
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Michael Sondow writes:
> John B. Reynolds a =E9crit:
>
> > You administer your zone indirectly by controlling which ISP runs it
> > directly.
>
> Administer the zone indirectly? What are you talking about? Is this
> a game of semantics t
At 09:49 PM 2/7/99 -0500, Michael Sondow wrote:
>John B. Reynolds a écrit:
>> Every domain name holder directly or
>> indirectly administers a DNS zone file. Are you sure you're not
>> confusing "DNS zone" with "root zone"?
>
>No, the domain holders don't administer zone files. That's done by t
All of them! (see Eberhard's question below;-)...
I also agree that the initial members of the startup DNSO should be
the Zone Administrators and not the Technical Contacts!
And, for Michael's information, the fact that he has contractred with
an ISP to do everythig for his DNS Zone, and not le
On Sun, Feb 07, 1999 at 10:37:39PM -0500, Bret A. Fausett wrote:
> Einar Stefferud wrote:
>
> >Here I am in strong agreement that the whole concept of Fair Hearing
> >Panels has been subvertted by inavertant editing whcih converts them
> >into a mecahisim to be used to stop progress on any Resear
In message <001401be52fb$9ddc9320$010a@jbr>, "John B. Reynolds" writes:
> Michael Sondow wrote:
> >
> > Einar Stefferud a écrit:
> >
> > > I agree with this concern, and I suggest that the initial membership
> > > be defined in some other more well defined way. One suggestion that
> > > makes
John B. Reynolds a écrit:
> You administer your zone indirectly by controlling which ISP runs it
> directly.
Administer the zone indirectly? What are you talking about? Is this a game
of semantics to you? It's a file. How do I change it's contents when it's on
a server in the house or office of
Einar Stefferud wrote:
>Here I am in strong agreement that the whole concept of Fair Hearing
>Panels has been subvertted by inavertant editing whcih converts them
>into a mecahisim to be used to stop progress on any Research Committee
>proposal that someone does not like.
I don't think that's a
Michael Sondow wrote:
>
> John B. Reynolds a écrit:
>
> > Every domain name holder directly or
> > indirectly administers a DNS zone file. Are you sure you're not
> > confusing "DNS zone" with "root zone"?
>
> No, the domain holders don't administer zone files. That's done
> by the ISPs
> and t
John B. Reynolds a écrit:
> How would this give control to ORSC?
Alright, perhaps my reaction was slightly exaggerated. Let's just say it's
strictly in their interest, to the direct detriment of other interests, my
own for example.
> Every domain name holder directly or
> indirectly administe
Michael Sondow wrote:
>
> Einar Stefferud a écrit:
>
> > I agree with this concern, and I suggest that the initial membership
> > be defined in some other more well defined way. One suggestion that
> > makes sense to me is "Anyone with a DNS Zone file to administer" to be
> > used to elect an INI
I would have to see the specific wording, but my initial reaction is that
the changes you suggest would largely answer my concerns (although I would
still prefer explicitly defined initial constituencies), along with a
revision to Section 5.9 similar to that suggested by AIP and NSI.
I am not sur
Einar Stefferud a écrit:
> I agree with this concern, and I suggest that the initial membership
> be defined in some other more well defined way. One suggestion that
> makes sense to me is "Anyone with a DNS Zone file to administer" to be
> used to elect an INITIAL Names Council
Yes, of course
Good constructive and useful criticism as I read it;-)...
>From your message Sun, 7 Feb 1999 10:42:42 -0600:
}
}William X. Walsh wrote:
}
}> I call for a vote of participants on this list for which draft
}> they support.
}>
}> It is time to vocalize your support, and clearly indicate who you
}> r
36 matches
Mail list logo
