|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded
> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of > jamie rishaw > Sent: February 3, 2001 5:36 PM > To: Patrick Greenwell > Cc: Paul A Vixie; [email protected] > Subject: Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded > > > > On Sat, Feb 03, 2001 at 02:14:12PM -0800, Patrick Greenwell wrote: > > > > I count 141 ICANN "fully: accrediated domain name registrars, with an > > unknown number of secondary registrars due to systems like OpenSRS. > > > > These organizations collectively handle second-level name resolution for > > the overwhelming majority of the millions of .com, .net, and > .org domains > > in use on the Internet. And while I haven't done a survey, I'd surmise > > that they overwhelmingly use BIND. > > > > Will these 141 organizations many of whose business relies on BIND be > > eligible for your fee-based list? Do they consitute providers > of "critical > > infrastructure" in your eyes? > > > > They're registrars. The don't directly provide DNS in any more critical > a nature than any commercial DNS provider. > > And, since they're commercial organizations using BIND in a commercial > aspect, I think they can cough up the money. Disclaimer: I'm not a registrar myself, but I thought that GTLD registrars sent everything to the NSI registry, and NSI still maintained the actual zone files on the GTLD servers. If this is correct, I would argue that they don't provide DNS in any way (except to their internal machines); certainly, they're not part of critical infrastructure (whereas *.gtld-servers.net, the contents of which they contribute to, certainly are). Therefore, they'd have less need to know about BIND security bugs than a commercial DNS provider, or a non-profit DNS provider like us. Vivien -- Vivien M. [email protected] Assistant System Administrator Dynamic DNS Network Services http://www.dyndns.org/
|