[ga] Critics say VeriSign still has...

[gavin.stokes@autodesk.com]

If you take a look at the posts, try reading the one that starts with "great points".  It sounds like support to me, but maybe a lifetime of English isn't sufficient.

-----Original Message-----
From: Roeland Meyer [mailto:rmeyer@mhsc.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 3:39 PM
To: 'gavin.stokes@autodesk.com'; sotiris@hermesnetwork.com; andy@navigator.co.nz
Cc: ga@dnso.org
Subject: RE: [ga] Critics say VeriSign still has...


> From: gavin.stokes@autodesk.com [mailto:gavin.stokes@autodesk.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 2:29 PM

> Thanks to everyone for jumping on that one.  I expected a 
> boatload of objections, and some support.  So far we see 
> both.  

Funny, I didn't see any support...

> But how about simply 
> disallowing resale of domains by anyone but a registrar, at a 
> standard price?  The complexities of this (based on transfer 
> of trademarks and what have you) are probably far less 
> significant than determining "hoarding."

Not hardly... There are so many ways to sell something, especially an
intangible good, that it is virtually impossible, at least not
cost-effective, to even try.

> That said, let's talk about the juvenile responses.

Let's not...

> I typed a few into my browser; 
> some worked, and some didn't.  And I still say, use it or 
> lose it.  They should lose any of them that they don't use, 
> but admittedly this may be impossible to enforce.

You obviously have no idea how easy it is to make a domain name appear "in
use", for various definitions of "in use". I can do this, for over 10,000
names, on a single Linux box.

> And what about misuse of NET and ORG?  I sent a message to 
> Network Solutions last year asking them why they were 
> suggesting ORG and NET domains to everyone, when you're 
> supposed to be a non-profit organization or a 
> network-services provider to use those domains.  They said 
> they don't enforce those anymore, because they couldn't.  

If you'd read the drelevent RFCs, you'd see for yourself how unenforcible
those charter definitions are. They are REALLY vague. They sound good on the
surface, but you don't have to scratch very deep to see where they start to
overlap.

> So, if you want to keep this organization from being a bigger 
> joke than it already is in the minds of many (thanks to 
> recent press coverage), stop making fun of people's E-mail addresses.

*That* I can agree with.
--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html