sitefinder technical discussions
In the interest in gaining more community review and comment, a discussion list has been setup to discuss factually-based technical issues and solutions surrounding the operational impact of wildcards in top-level domains on Internet applications. VeriSign technical people will participate in discussions that are within the scope for this mailing list. The list is sitefinder-tech-discuss@lists.elistx.com To subscribe or unsubscribe the usual "-request" convention works. Send a message to: sitefinder-tech-discuss-request@lists.elistx.com Put "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. Regards, Mark -- Mark Kosters markk@verisignlabs.com Verisign Applied Research
Translation:
In the interest in gaining more community review and comment, a discussion list has been setup to discuss factually-based technical issues and solutions surrounding the operational impact of wildcards in top-level domains on Internet applications.
VeriSign technical people will participate in discussions that are within the scope for this mailing list.
"Verisign will discuss the technical impact of this issue on this list. However, we all agree there is no technical impact, since this works. Furthermore, by limiting this list to a technical conversation, we will completely ignore the political impact, and political correctness of these acts in any forum." Having been involved in the community internet for as long as I have, I want to wretch. I'd think Mark would be one of those, as well.
On 06.10 23:51, Mark Kosters wrote:
In the interest in gaining more community review and comment, a discussion list has been setup to discuss factually-based technical issues and solutions surrounding the operational impact of wildcards in top-level domains on Internet applications.
VeriSign technical people will participate in discussions that are within the scope for this mailing list.
The list is sitefinder-tech-discuss@lists.elistx.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe the usual "-request" convention works. Send a message to:
sitefinder-tech-discuss-request@lists.elistx.com
Put "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" in the body of the message.
I am very hesitant to join this particular list because I am afraid that Verisign will somehow use the fact that I am subscribed as they please in their PR efforts, e.g. "A panel of Internet experts convened by Verisign Inc including <insert your name here> has discussed ....., the panel did not come to consensus that ...... ." I would rather use existing fora such as the relevant IETF WG(s) or this list. Daniel
Mark Kosters wrote:
In the interest in gaining more community review and comment, a discussion list has been setup to discuss factually-based technical issues and solutions surrounding the operational impact of wildcards in top-level domains on Internet applications.
We already have such mailing lists. 1) for technical "specification of message formats, message handling, and data formats used for DNS client-server and server-server communication": http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/ A lively moderated discussion of wildcards is already underway. 2) for "[i]ssues surrounding the operation of DNS, recommendations concerning the configuration of DNS servers, and other issues with the use of the protocol": http://ops.ietf.org/lists/ops-area/
VeriSign technical people will participate in discussions that are within the scope for this mailing list.
VeriSign technical people should have participated elsewhere, and this mess might have been less likely to occur. I will not participate in a VeriSign sponsored list, as that might give fodder for another "press release" claiming network operators and designers had reviewed and approved the VeriSign changes. I recommend that others only join neutral unaffiliated discussion lists. -- William Allen Simpson Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32
At 9:27 AM -0400 10/7/03, William Allen Simpson wrote:
Mark Kosters wrote:
In the interest in gaining more community review and comment, a discussion list has been setup to discuss factually-based technical issues and solutions surrounding the operational impact of wildcards in top-level domains on Internet applications.
We already have such mailing lists.
1) for technical "specification of message formats, message handling, and data formats used for DNS client-server and server-server communication": http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/
A lively moderated discussion of wildcards is already underway.
2) for "[i]ssues surrounding the operation of DNS, recommendations concerning the configuration of DNS servers, and other issues with the use of the protocol": http://ops.ietf.org/lists/ops-area/
VeriSign technical people will participate in discussions that are within the scope for this mailing list.
VeriSign technical people should have participated elsewhere, and this mess might have been less likely to occur.
I will not participate in a VeriSign sponsored list, as that might give fodder for another "press release" claiming network operators and designers had reviewed and approved the VeriSign changes. I recommend that others only join neutral unaffiliated discussion lists.
Judging by my troubles in signing up for it -- and, sort of as a matter of crochety pride, I am NOT going to go through a browser to sign up for a mailing list (at least run by people who ought to know better about email but seem to assume the World is the Web), the list may become moot. I thought I was on namedroppers, but I haven't seen a message in a long time and will make a point of resubscribing.
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 09:27:06AM -0400, William Allen Simpson wrote:
I will not participate in a VeriSign sponsored list, as that might give fodder for another "press release" claiming network operators and designers had reviewed and approved the VeriSign changes. I recommend that others only join neutral unaffiliated discussion lists.
Without taking a position on the merits of SiteFinder, I would note that VeriSign representatives mentioned their mailing list today at the meeting in Washington, DC as evidence that close collaboration with the Internet community was in progress and that any technical problems it caused could be solved (once SiteFinder is back online, they meant). -Declan
participants (6)
-
Alex Rubenstein -
Daniel Karrenberg -
Declan McCullagh -
Howard C. Berkowitz -
Mark Kosters -
William Allen Simpson