North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: New domain name registry rules (was: On-going Internet Emergency and Domain Names)

  • From: Jim Popovitch
  • Date: Tue Apr 03 08:29:43 2007
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:Subject:From:To:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date:Message-Id:Mime-Version:X-Mailer:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=xwJbnhw0Kp+TskrQ0r54uQtLXKyrOqEcOmiQXgZqCGgTGJFmf/0vcrDu8u9uOIXwS/kG8wV+LoWuW5zyB/Xt2UGnOUN635yYQqBT56sEpQrrUYdDdp62J1T2siLxWKyRfbUR8mlsRRvUBJx3CxBR6AWoC0MSGPXgJQnzNPC5hjA= ;
On Tue, 2007-04-03 at 12:43 +0100, [email protected] wrote:
> Well, I think the question is, why to new domain additions have to be
> lumped in with all other zone changes and updated within minutes? Why
> can't new domain additions be treated specially and be held back for a
> day or two in order to prevent tasters from abusing the network. 

Because legit mom & pop shops want to sign-up and build a website in the
same way they throw a brochure together down at Kinkos.  Welcome to the
"here and now" generation. ;-)

I'm not saying that I agree with immediate domain registration, but I
understand why it is what it is today.

Want to fix it: have ICANN regulate and fine registrars who don't screen
their clientele.  There are enough spam/virus/bot reports out there to
see who is responsible for what.

-Jim P.