-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of jamie rishaw Sent: February 3, 2001 5:36 PM To: Patrick Greenwell Cc: Paul A Vixie; nanog@merit.edu 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. vivienm@dyndns.org Assistant System Administrator Dynamic DNS Network Services http://www.dyndns.org/