IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] getting TLDs to fix other people's problems

Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> Sun, 21 December 2014 09:47 UTC

Return-Path: <jim@rfc1035.com>
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3B541A0378 for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Dec 2014 01:47:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id C-50BBQcBV-c for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Dec 2014 01:47:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shaun.rfc1035.com (shaun.rfc1035.com [93.186.33.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B642E1A0370 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Sun, 21 Dec 2014 01:47:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gromit.rfc1035.com (gromit.rfc1035.com [195.54.233.69]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shaun.rfc1035.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6114C242143B; Sun, 21 Dec 2014 09:47:54 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com>
In-Reply-To: <7A31183A-CC1E-4F0A-A2EA-848B10B60A2B@insensate.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 09:47:53 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8CC8F3E7-D6D9-47FA-8D58-F4154C5FE4DB@rfc1035.com>
References: <20141220125805.GB20765@xs.powerdns.com> <20141220142506.C7EA12630502@rock.dv.isc.org> <A78F8417-AEA2-42BF-A7D5-96FE99DCBBBE@rfc1035.com> <20141220204337.4F47026313BC@rock.dv.isc.org> <7A31183A-CC1E-4F0A-A2EA-848B10B60A2B@insensate.co.uk>
To: Lawrence Conroy <lconroy@insensate.co.uk>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsext/TiChgLT1X6zU4QXGQI5ng5Ywqcc
Cc: bert hubert <bert.hubert@netherlabs.nl>, DNSEXT Group Working <dnsext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dnsext] getting TLDs to fix other people's problems
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 09:48:00 -0000

On 21 Dec 2014, at 01:34, Lawrence Conroy <lconroy@insensate.co.uk> wrote:

> Registries may be OK, but do you expect them to spam their customers' customers?

Indeed. My earlier rant overlooked that one.

Most registrars do not want registries to contact registrants - ever. Registrars like to have total control over the communications to their registrants, usually to the point where the registrant is unaware of the registry's existence. Quite a few ccTLD registries have policies which forbid the registry from contacting the registrant.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email