RE: [ga] WLS: Dotster posts the definitive arguments against it, and more

["L. Gallegos" <jandl@jandl.com>]

On 11 Jul 2002, at 8:21, George Kirikos wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> --- "L. Gallegos" <jandl@jandl.com> wrote:
> > I am totally against the WLS, but could you explain how it effects 
> > security and stabiltiy of the DNS?  We're talking about .COM, not the
> > entire internet.
> 
> I'm glad you brought that up, about .COM possibly not being the entire
> internet. I draw your attention to the statements of Verisign at:
> 
> http://www.neustar.com/pressroom/files/announcements/7601-washington_busine
> ss_jrl.pdf
> 
> Verisign stated clearly that "I don't think there will *EVER* be
> another .com" (emphasis added) It's that special place in the DNS that
> requires that ICANN pay particular attention to the monopolist Verisign,
> since by their own admission they are not just another registry. 

Still, please tell me how this affects the security and stability of the 
internet?

While it could be difficult if .COM fell off the face of the earth, it would 
not stop the internet nor would it stop the DNS.  People would simply 
have to (1) temporarily publish their IP addresses for websites, (2) 
temporarily use their ISPs for email addressing and inform their 
customer mailing lists, (3) obtain a domain in another TLD, (4) 
nameservres using .COM domains would have to change to other 
domains.  A mess for a short time, sure.  Irrecoverable, no.

The interent would go right on working.

Now, the situation begs this question.  Should there be tons of TLDs to 
offset the devastating effect the failure of this registry could have on 
millions of people using .COM?  You betcha.  Second question.  Would 
the WLS issue be such a blistering sore if there were at least dozens of 
TLDs where people could *choose* to go to any of sevreral registries for 
their commercial domains?  Heck, the ones that had no such wait list 
might just become  popular over night.  Competition would be alive and 
well, this time among registries as opposed to just registrars for the 
registries.  Of course it would have to be honest appearing registries 
that were open to all on a FCFS basis.  That's not likely to happen 
under the ICANN regime.

But George, I still don't see how any of this affects the security of the 
internet and DNS.

Leah


> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> George Kirikos
> http://www.kirikos.com/
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free
> http://sbc.yahoo.com
> --
> 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
> 
> 


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